Apologetix?

I don't think you can say there is "good and bad in all musical styles." "All" is a big word. There are some musical styles with no redeeming qualities, and the list of those musical styles with no Christian benefit is larger yet.

The local church context is important, but the principles are the same in every context. They may get applied differently.

 

Yes, but in an entirely different context.

 

Gekko,

I haven't had a chance to listen to these parodies. I'm generally not a fan of this type of parody, but they can be very effective and possibly reach a segment of society or sub-group that would not listen to a traditional approach.

I believe Christians should create new art and not simply borrow from the world. In the 70s there was the Coke "It's the real thing" commercial - churches and parachurch groups soon picked it up. It was a fad that continues to this day.

To quote the Apostle Paul, "If Christ be preached..."

I have used secular songs in worship when they fit the context and theme of the service. Some examples: "You've Got a Friend," "Shower the People," even "The Impossible Dream."

I wrap this up by saying, this may not be for me, but if ministry is happening, go for it!

Tim

 

Which musical styles have no redeeming qualities to you? I admit, I don't like some, but I can find good in all musical styles. By good I mean quality in production, peformance and writing. Many times I use the style as my guide.

 

Yes, but in an entirely different context. </font>[/QUOTE]PLease share with me the different context. So this statement only applies to one time in one place?

 

None of these things are sinful.

 

There is righteous anger, there is sensuality and sexuality between a husband and wife and so on and so on. God gave us the capacity for emotions and there is a proper place for all of them.

 

They're not parodies, they're simply singing popular tunes with relgious text. There are many hymns in the Christian hymnal that are secular tunes with sacred text applied. "Rejoice the Lord is King" is a good example. Even "O Sacred Head Now Wounded" came about this way, the tune taken from a 1601 love song called " Are All My Feelings". And don't even get me started on "O Danny Boy".


Those who say this is wrong are simply ignorant of their own hymnal history. Those same people don't seem to have a problem with the Blind Boys of Alabama's rendition of Amazing Grace, but God forbid anyone else do what they did. Hypocrites all.

 

It seems that even in our day, we still have our Judizers in almost every area. Trying to impose their ideas and preferences on everyone because they believe that they really understand God. I have heard the personal testimony of and been ministered to by different kinds of Christian music and the artists that perform. It seems to me that if we could get over the stupid stuff, accept that we are all different because God has given each of us a different ministry and set of convictions that are perfect for that ministry, we would be able to do more for the cause of Christ.

I have sat in church services with Jack Hyles style music and watched people tune out everything that goes on because it is not effective to those people. Likewise I have heard Southern Gospel songs (which I love) that have almost no purpose other than to just be a good positive song. I have heard them sung in Sunday am services and not been ministered to in any respect. I have also heard these and other styles, including what many deem the world's music, CCM and been ministered to in a great and wonderful way. Why, because God calls all men and women to different ministries in different places.

Just because a song does not have an approved tempo or beat or rythym (?) does not mean that it is a worldly song. Just because it does not have a salvation message does not make it reprobate music. I like all types of music to one extent or another and am able to pick out those that are positive and uplifting and those that are not. But no matter what, I don't play the role of a modern Judizer because it is not what I deem appropriate. That is up to God to bless it or curse it.

 

"To you"??? Individual taste or preference has no matter in this discussion. Music communicates without question. Therefore, music that communicates inappropriately is without redeeming value.

That indicates that your judgment is skewed. Many people have been taught that their judgment is the final rule of acceptability and truth. Nothing could be more wrong. The fact that you can find good in evil is simply not true. Your sense are not trained to discern between good and evil.

By "good," I mean good. Something can be well done in production, performance, and writing ... and still be objectively evil.

No, the statement is true, but in it, Paul is not talking about using worldly means to accomplish spiritual objectives. He is talking about morally neutral things, or things about which believers have liberties.

This thread was about theft of unrighteous "art" to pursue a righteous goal. How are there three pages of discussion about this?

 

None of these things are sinful. </font>[/QUOTE]But all of them can be, and when music communicates them unrighteously, the music is sinful.

 

Perhaps the greater sin here is being ignorant of musical theory and history. You are comparing apples and oranges. We are talking things that are objectively wrong.

But even that wasn't the point of the discussion. The OP was about stealing songs and art from the world to communicate about God. The simple truth is that God deserves better, the morality of music aside.

 

Fortunately, that is completely irrelevant here since no one is doing that. If you associate this with Judiazers, it is only because you don't know what a Judaizer was. Liberty in Christ was never a biblical excuse for unrighteousness. The fact that we "could" do something was never a statemenet that "we should" do something. Paul said he gladly limited himself (becoming all thigns to all men) so that he could reach some. He was not willing to do everything that he could do because there was something greater at stake.

1 Cor 1-2 and 2 Cor 2-4 is explicit on this matter of using worldly means (borrowing from the world) to preach teh gospel. If we are going to preach, let's do it without the "persuasive words" of man's wisdom but in simplicity so that the power will be seen to be of God. Of course, that would require that we actually be godly and have God's power. It is usually easier just to borrow from others and whip people into a frenzy.

So have I. But that is irrelevant.

I completely agree. Why even bring this stupid stuff up? It is genuinely stupid.

 

None of these things are sinful. </font>[/QUOTE]But all of them can be, and when music communicates them unrighteously, the music is sinful. </font>[/QUOTE]How on earth can music communicate something unrighteously? Does it whisper bad thoughts in my ear? Does it magically penetrate the darkest recesses of my mind and flip all the "bad" switches on?

The problem here is that you are attributing evil to the external. Yes, every good thing God gave can be be corrupted. What corrupts the good? Our hearts. When we sin, it is always from a willfully disobedient heart, and therein lies the root and home of all sin. we twist the use of everything and anything God gives us for bad. Music can't do that. Only a heart can.

 

I think this kind of silly response indicates just how serious the lack of understanding of righteousness, communication, and culture really is in professing Christendom. Music communicates in a variety of ways, as is universally recognized except for those in CCM, or those who like to defend CCM. Not all CCM is bad or unrighteous, just as not all pop music is. But there certainly is bad music, unrighteous in its communication regardless of intent.

No, I'm not. I think you need to go back and read again.

Exactly, which is why music can be corrupted.

Of course music can't twist itself. But man has twisted music and used it unrighteously. Ungodly music comes from a heart that is ungodly.

Some music theory and philosophy would certainly do you some good. And I am no hardnose on this. I have a wide taste in music, but to assert that music is amoral has no basis in reality.

 

Well then let's have it already. I'd rather have an answer to the question than this silly posture of wisdom. How does music communicate unrighteously?


Me:Yes, every good thing God gave can be be corrupted.

You:Exactly, which is why music can be corrupted.

Is not the "corrupting" of the good the sin itself?


What use or sense is there in saying that something external to the heart is evil?

 

By inciting ungodly passions or emotions, which music unquestionably does. It communicates unrighteousness by trivializing the majesty of God. It can do this a number of different ways.

No, that is only part of it.

To properly reflect truth, we have to say so. When Paul says to approve things that are good, he is talking about the things themselves, not simply the responses or motives of the heart. It is true that the heart is involved in evil. It is too limiting to say that only the heart is involved.

 

"To you"??? Individual taste or preference has no matter in this discussion. Music communicates without question. Therefore, music that communicates inappropriately is without redeeming value.

That indicates that your judgment is skewed. Many people have been taught that their judgment is the final rule of acceptability and truth. Nothing could be more wrong. The fact that you can find good in evil is simply not true. Your sense are not trained to discern between good and evil.

By "good," I mean good. Something can be well done in production, performance, and writing ... and still be objectively evil.

No, the statement is true, but in it, Paul is not talking about using worldly means to accomplish spiritual objectives. He is talking about morally neutral things, or things about which believers have liberties.

This thread was about theft of unrighteous "art" to pursue a righteous goal. How are there three pages of discussion about this? </font>[/QUOTE]I can agree about something being well done and yet being used for "evil." That has to with use, attitude and purpose of the performeer and hearer.

I've used some (very few) secular songs effectively in worship. The text and style fit the theme and mood of our service.


Once again, How is some music intrisically evil and other music not?

Please give a concrete answer and not an answeer in "churchese." You say my judgement is skewed (I find your arrogance at this point highly offensive, but I have forgiven you for that), yet you refuse to educate me and clearly and succinctly answer my question as to the actual properties of the "immoral" or intrisically evil music. Give me specifics so that I can define this tyoe of music.. PLease use the language of music to define this -- What type of rhythm? what type of melody? What instruments of vocalizing? Please be precise.

Question two: How do you feel about Beethoven's very secular melody (Ode to Joy) being used with the hymn "Joyful, Joyful, We adore Thee." Could this not be an example of "theft of unrighteous 'art' to pursue a righteous goal." If so, whay" and if not, why?

Personally, I'm not a fan of most CCm. Actually I'm considered a "dinosaur" by most of my Minister of Music peers for my insistence of using hymns over "praise and worship" styles. I find the texts shallow and the music boring and not always of the highest quality. I also find this in many traditional and gospel hymns.

Personally, as a Minister of Music, I choose the best from the various traditions that are APPROPRIATE for the church I am currently serving. I tended to use more "praise and worship" (I really hate this term, because all music is part of praise and worship of God) type songs in my last church and more hymns and anthems of a traditional nature in my current church.

I think our discussion should be more appropriate/inappropriate rather than godd/bad or even immoral/moral. Once again a C major chord or a certain beat, not even a backbeat, carries no morality -- I will concede that there may be associations to some things that are "immoral" but the music itself is not.

One more question. What emotions are negative to you? Could not our National Anthem instill pride in us yet hate in an enemy? Cultural context, not the music, plain and simple.

Are you also saying, for example, that African Christians should not use indigenous music in the worship of God?

Thanks for the discussion.

Hope you haev a great Suanday worshipping God with your congreation.