1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Are there good and evil forms of music?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Aaron, Jun 27, 2002.

  1. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    First of all, you have a complete misapprehension of the type of communication music is. And though I have told you over and over, you act as if I have said nothing.

    No one can communicate ideas through music. They communciate mood and ellicit emotion. It will either be sensual or non-sensual.

    I will tell you the mood and emotion of your little ditty after work (I work long hours at the end of the week.) I will tell you whether it is sensual or non-sensual and why.

    But if you want to understand why I think the way I do (its' the right way), It's more than just listening to one piece and commenting on it. Many of [the] misinterpretations of Scriptures upon which you base your erroneous conclusions have to be dealt with.

    But as I have said before, I refuse to get into any debate with you unless in the one-on-one forum. Don't interpret that as a concession. I just wonder why you're afraid to get into a forum where will debate me without your entourage of rock music fans.

    [Edited that last horrendous sentence in the fourth paragraph..sheesh! :rolleyes: ]

    [ July 11, 2002, 10:13 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
     
  2. Matticus

    Matticus New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aaron, first, I don't see how Odemus is misinterpreting scripture. Second, I don't understand how you're interpreting it or what your argument is anymore. You've got me very confused. Third, where is this one-on-one debate forum thingy, I would like this issue to get cleared up.

    God Bless
    Matt
     
  3. Odemus

    Odemus New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now that is funny. I don't know, nor have I ever addressed anyone else who happens to take my side on this issue in this forum (aside from Ransom, but in that case I was telling him how futile this endeavor was).

    I'm not afraid of anything at all, I just don't see a need to switch forums.When you get off of work and give me your analysis of the ditty I presented, I will pick it apart completely because it will not be based on any Scriptural truths.What does it matter if you get picked apart here or in a one on one forum?

    Now if you were to agree to stick entirely to the authority of Scripture on any moral claims you make I might be persuaded, but until then, your logic can fall flat on it's face publicly.

    Regardless, you have had your share of supporters, and I don't refer to them as your entourage of intolerant instrument haters.I have taken the time to address every person who has disagreed with me personally, why shouldn't you?We are all brothers and sisters in Christ here, such distinctions are frivilous and unproductive.

    [ July 11, 2002, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Odemus ]
     
  4. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ah, yes. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

    Evaluation forthcoming. As you can see, it was late before I could get to my computer. As I must rise at 4:00 am tomorrow, and work to 6:30 or 7 again, I will type some tonight, some tomorrow, then post it.

    BTW, the one-on-one forum is public. It just won't allow interference from others.
     
  5. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Okay. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. I am ready to discuss my evaluation with you. But before I do, you must agree to something.

    What I have found when dealing with topics like this is that I usually end up writing a treatise on Christian character. In order to rightly discern the mood of a piece, one must have firm grasp of what it means to be a Christian.

    The Christian discipline is concerned with two main objectives, the mortification of the flesh, and submission to the Holy Spirit, Romans 8:1. But we are not wise enough on our own to recognize the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. So Paul in Galations 5 gives us the distinquishing characteristics of such. And notice that it is not a complete list. In otherwords, he left some unmentioned :eek: but included those he did not mention specifically by saying, "...and such like," Gal. 5:21.

    And so not only those things which are not specifically mentioned, but those things that are like them, are ranked together as works of the flesh, and we are expected to use wisdom and discernment to recognize them.

    It is now evident the arbitrary premise upon which you proceed that a subject must be explicitly mentioned in order to make a moral judgment flies in the face of the Apostle's very clear expectation to the contrary.

    According the Scriptures, I have the right--no the duty--to say, "This is like..." You may not dismiss it offhand simply because something is not explicit, or, more accurately, because some things are not yet obvious to you. You must, if we will be true to the Scriptures and carry on an intelligent interaction, present your evidence to support your view that "This is not like..."

    Agree to this very reasonable and Scriptural condition, or I will proceed no further.

    [ July 12, 2002, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
     
  6. Odemus

    Odemus New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haha!What a sham!

    If you said "gambling is wrong" and I said no "gambling is just dandy because the Bible never uses the word gambling", would you say "well then please prove from Scripture that gambling is an accepetable Christian activity"?

    Actually I'm beginning to wonder if that would be your approach.So basically what you are saying is "accept my interpretation of Scripture or else...."

    Well I don't.The Bible does not once in any way ever make moral claims about the inherent nature of music PERIOD

    I could put any piece of music up here and your analysis will always be based on your own subjective feeling.You will simply say, "this is sensual, whether it is obvious to the world or not" or, "if you do not agree this is sensual, then you don't understand what it means to be a Christian, and you are not interested in spiritual truths."

    Never once will you ever use Scripture to substantiate your claims, that is the sickest, most depraved thing about this whole charade.

    I consider my point proved.

    Good bye Aaron, may God rain showers of blessings on you.

    Jacob

    [ July 13, 2002, 12:58 AM: Message edited by: Odemus ]
     
  7. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Jacob said: So basically what you are saying is "accept my interpretation of Scripture or else....".

    Actually, that is what you have been saying to me from the very beginning. You say I must prove to you according to the way you read the Scriptures. What I'm saying is, the Scriptures say that I may--no, I must--draw correlations and parallels. You say that that it doesn't. But this is the third direct Scriptural reference I've made supporting my approach.

    You have provided none.

    Before we can talk about music, we need to know how to interpret Scripture. I'm still willing, but we have to begin with a common frame of reference.

    And this has been the debate from the beginning. It hasn't been about the music, it has been about how to interpret the Scriptures. Of course my method is right has been the method applied by great theologians from the beginning--Christ, the Apostle Paul, etc.

    So, I'm willing to continue, but the discussion now is which approach is right. Yours or mine?

    [ July 13, 2002, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
     
  8. Odemus

    Odemus New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    You just don't get it do you?It is one thing to take Scriptural principles and apply them to things which aren't specifically spoken of in Scripture, it is quite another to simply call something sinful and then apply Scripture to it.

    You lost the argument Aaron.Pack it up.If sin requires your pharisaical understanding of the Bible to determine, not only is the world hopeless, so are many many Christians who live obviously holy lives.
     
  9. ormond

    ormond New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    0
    good and evil = ouch, hurt, mistake but learn then repent.

    good and enjoy = peace and very happy love freedom but unpain.

    amen,

    Bro R. :cool: [​IMG]
     
  10. latterrain77

    latterrain77 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Aaron. I agree with some of what you have said. However, while music itself can potentially be sinful (IF composed by the ill-intentions of a sinful human songwriter/producer), the same is not so of a musical instrument. A musical instrument itself, is no more sinful than a Bible used as an instrument by a False Preacher!

    Surely, it is a good thing to make music to GOD. However, I see nothing in Psalm 92:1-3 that suggests any particular "style" of music must be employed, or that certain styles should be restricted, in order to do that. Any style should suffice. GOD is not a respecter of persons (Act. 10:34).

    Still, I appreciate and wholly AGREE with your concept, that much of what is offered as "music" or "film" or other media, is a direct afront to much of what we KNOW to be Biblical. I thank you for reminding me of that Aaron.

    latterrain77

    [ July 14, 2002, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: latterrain77 ]
     
  11. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
  12. emopunker

    emopunker New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, the Old Testament records even worse acts done by humans (bad enough to warrant God's desctruction of Sodom and Gommorah, and even of the whole Earth). And this was long before the majority of rock bands existed.
     
  13. Mike McK

    Mike McK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, the accounts from the vast majority of people who were there suggest that the sex, drugs and other illicit activity were confined to a handful of people in a very, very small minority rather than the false view of the festival often pushed by the anti-rock gestapo and much of popular culture, which tends to play up the bad behaviour of a few rather than appreciating the festival for what it was.

    If music was the cause, it seems that it would have affected more of the people there.

    Once again, judging an entire group based in the actions of a few.

    Actually, the Dead's set consisted of a 90 minute version of "St. Stephen", the Merle Haggard hit, "Mama Tried", a medley of "Dark Star" and "High Time" and "Turn on Your Love Light".

    Not exactly orgy inciting music. :rolleyes:

    Personally, I would think you would be much more outraged at the Who's set.

    One set I don't think anyone could argue with is the Band's.

    Thirty three years and it's still a joy to listen to.

    CSN&Y's is also very good (naturally).

    [ July 19, 2002, 07:28 PM: Message edited by: Smoke_Eater ]
     
  14. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    I still maintain, gentlemen, that the only reason for the very being of Woodstock was the music. Had there been no music, there would have been no great gathering of young people. The purpose of gathering together was for the music. The message of the music was vile. It led to immorality, whether or not there was already drugs on the grounds, whether or not their were already evil intentions already present, the music put forth a message and a mood that only accelerated the evil that was present.

    Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, who can know it?
    DHK
     
  15. Odemus

    Odemus New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    We are finally in perfect agreement DHK.If we desire to evaluate and make moral judgements on any communication, we must always look at the message.There, and only there will the fruits be determined.
     
  16. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Smoke said: Actually, the accounts from the vast majority of people who were there suggest that the sex, drugs and other illicit activity were confined to a handful of people in a very, very small minority rather than the false view of the festival often pushed by the anti-rock gestapo and much of popular culture, which tends to play up the bad behaviour of a few rather than appreciating the festival for what it was.

    If music was the cause, it seems that it would have affected more of the people there.


    Is that also your impression of Woodstock II?

    [ July 21, 2002, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
     
  17. Odemus

    Odemus New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very good point Aaron.

    Wouldn't you agree that the violence, vandalism and sexual assaults were reflective of the message these bands at Woodstock II were promoting?

    One glance at the lyrics of bands Like Marilyn Manson and Nine Inch Nails reveals that this is the kind of behaviour they glorify.You will no doubt find that the cultural differences between the two separate Woodstocks can be seen entirely in the messages.

    [ July 21, 2002, 05:59 PM: Message edited by: Odemus ]
     
  18. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Why certainly. I also see the styles they use to accompany them. The styles are wholly consistent with the message of the words.

    You don't see this kind of behavior at a Bach concert, and there is no reason to assume the Woodstock folks are any worse sinners than those listening to Bach.
     
  19. Ernie Brazee

    Ernie Brazee <img src ="/ernie.JPG">

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    0
    When music instills sensual arousal , it becomes blasphemy to tack spiritual lyrics to it.

    God of the Bible is a God of the spirit, not the god of the flesh.
     
  20. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 26, 2001
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    5
    People sitting in those classical concerts can have all sorts of unseen sin, such as pride ("we're so much more 'civilized' than those heathens). One can just look at all the sins of the past, even while everyone was outwardly 'more behaved" and the music was 'traditional', but then this is often ignored because all we look at is "overt" sins.

    Just because some Christians may be going overboard doesn't mean that all contemporary styles are bad. Just look at how classical sounds are used in New Age. The sounds go along with its meditations and "spiritual" concepts, but you wouldn't say the music casued this to the point that Christians should avoid classical.
     
Loading...