MMF - Another rock n roll topic

Can anyone else here hear legalism rolling on in?

...goes back to listening to Third Day

Bro. Adam

 

Aaron, I actually think you're argument's been defeated too. You have no scripture to support it, what you do quote does not seem to have any relevance. Either that, or all it does is prove that secular rock music is wrong. Which we already knew. Please, either prove your argument or admit that you're wrong. Pride was Lucifer's sin. Please don't get too caught up in having to be right. If you prove that rock music is inherently evil, I will admit defeat and and the argument. THanks

God Bless
Matt

 

Teresa,

I think it is in bad faith for you to quote my opening statement wrenched from its context, written "pen in cheek" as it was. But without the second line you take away its intended meaning.

Besides, your question belies the fact that you have not read the exchange between Jacob and me very carefully.

(changed nominative "I" to its proper objective "me.")

[ July 03, 2002, 11:52 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

1) In the thread where you tried to establish that certain instruments are considered by God to be inherently sinful and inappropriae for worship.The Scriptures make absolutely no assertions whatsoever in any capacity about the morality of instruments.

2) In any thread where you have asserted that certain types of music can be considered inherently sinful, and then when cornered you run from the query presented to you.

If I present the questions again will you answer them?Or will you continue to be deceitful and dodge?

I don't doubt that one bit.

That right there is the basis of your entire approach, declarative statements, no evidence, and worst of all, no Scripture.

Now, how do you know that if there is no Scriptural criteria unless you judge according to your feelings? </font>[/QUOTE]

It's a good thing I have the Bible

This has to do with passing moral judgement on music how?

No, I assume you condemn certain types of music based upon Pharisaical law.

No, I assume that you don't understand how sin really operates and holds people in it's grip.If you did, then this silly idea of yours would evaporate instantly.

This is based upon what Scripture?

If you are in my presence, I will not play my music.Plain and simple.If the Church as a whole had to abstain from every thing which a vocal minority found sinful, the church would grow stagnant.

My worship of God in music and song glorifies God.You have no scriptural basis to judge me otherwise.

What fruits have you seen in my life? What do you know of my walk with God? By what Scripture do you judge me?

[ July 03, 2002, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: Odemus ]

 

Words are fruit too.

I'm done arguing with you. I find that I spend most of my time referring you back to the things I've said and correcting your gross misreadings.

And as I've said to Mike on more than one occasion, my goal here is not to convince those given over to sensual worship, (To them spiritual things are foolish.) though peradventure God may will one be persuaded. I post to secure those whose spirits are grieved with the worldliness invading the sanctuary through music.

Since you last post was a mere rehash of old business, I see no point to continue. However, if you decide you would like to debate a (as in one) point and agree to stick to the topic, and deal with the evidence itself, I'll be happy to continue, but only in the one on one forum.

 

....as everything you have ever said here is nothing more than self righteous condemnation. I'll be glad to end this debate.

Let it be known that the only misreading has been on your part.The things you say are quite easily understood and refuted (as you have in fact seen) because they are based in the false logic of legalism, not Scripture (as you have in fact repeatedly demonstrated).There is no reson to continue this debate in any other forum because you will never accept Scripture as the final authority.The small bits of 'evidence' that you do submit in favor of your position implode before they ever leave your keyboard, yet when the inadequacies are brought to light, you merely ignore and move on.Do you understand how frustrating that is?

For my part I admit that my words have taken a less than Christian hostility at times and I do apologize for that.I should be seeking your benefit in a spirit of brotherly love, not righteous indignation.

So let's agree to disagree shall we?

 

Aaron said:

And as I've said to Mike on more than one occasion, my goal here is not to convince those given over to sensual worship, (To them spiritual things are foolish.)

In 1 Cor. 2:15, from whence you get the above idea, Paul is speaking of unregenerate men.

Is that your idea of people who don't agree with you concerning music? That they are unregenerate? (Or is this just another example of your inability to handle Scripture correctly?)

 

Ransom, I'm afraid you would have more success climbing a mountain of jello.This debate is futile because as you have just pointed out, Aaron refuses to be held accountable to Scripture.

I pray that Aaron will see the error in his judgement and if he doesn't it isn't my place to pursue his rationale any longer.

I prayed for some time about this issue and the Lord directed me to this passage:

What more could possibly be said about this issue?

[ July 05, 2002, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: Odemus ]

 

Im affraid i dissagre with the idea that if you take out the lyrics the song will have no evil or good elements to it. Once a musician picks up his/her instrument and starts writing hes/shes putting feeling into this music and even in many cases a spirit into it. Now the words of the song are very, very important to the general feeling and spirit of the song but they are not the only contributer to it. The difference between a christian song an a secular song is that the writer of the christian song is bringing Jesus into it and is getting a holy inspiration from Him and covering his music with His blood. The secular artist is only putting himself into it and we all know that, that is no good. But that is not what this disscussion is about, this disscussion is about a style as a whole.And in that case the style is neutral, infact any style is neutal.

[ July 05, 2002, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: SorryDude ]

 

SorryDude, are you saying you can determine the 'spirit' of a particular piece of music just by listening to it?In other words are you saying that you detect sin or righteousness just by hearing a melody?

I've always looked at music as being morally neutral, precisely because it is impossible to communicate explicit meaning through it.Can you give me an example of a piece of music (no lyrics) where there is what you would consider to be some sort of expressed sin?

 

Ransom said: In 1 Cor. 2:15, from whence you get the above idea, Paul is speaking of unregenerate men.

Is that your idea of people who don't agree with you concerning music? That they are unregenerate? (Or is this just another example of your inability to handle Scripture correctly?)

Christians can still be carnally minded 1 Cor. 3:3. In that sense, though they are growing by the milk of the word, they still choke upon the meat. They can still "walk as [natural] men."

This is elementary. I thought you more skilled in the word of righteousness than that. I guess I was wrong.

[ July 05, 2002, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Aaron said:

Christians can still be carnally minded 1 Cor. 3:3.

We were talking about 2:14, not 3:3. Don't play the bait-and-switch game. Paul is not speaking here of Christians of any stripe, but the unregenerate.

But thanks for admitting, even tacitly, that your ability to rightly handle the word of truth is lacking, specifically in the context department.

This is elementary. I thought you more skilled in the word of righteousness than that. I guess I was wrong.

Your skill at allegorizing and de-contextualizing is not one which I aspire to. I'd say I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not.

[ July 05, 2002, 06:57 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

...and if they are walking as natural men, then spiritual things to them are foolish.

Elementary.

But I'm finished discussing the topic with you. You aren't interested in the issues. You won't leave the discussion in the arena of the issues. You delight in making them accutely personal, and I am ashamed to say that you have succeeded in provoking me to respond to you in like manner.

If you wish to discuss the issues, instead of merely dismissing them with the false assumption of your rhetorical superiority and offer real evidence to the contrary, then I am willing. But it is well past time to rise about these tit-for-tat exchanges.

[ July 05, 2002, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Hey Aaron I just have a question for you, how do you know that Judas is in hell? maybe at the last minute he repented and was truley sorry. I mean Jesus was already dead at that point so the worlds sins had already been payed for in blood. I think thats pretty foolishly bold of you to decide who is in hell and who isn't. Also, Judas wasn't necisarily predestined to betray Jesus, its just if he hadn't done it some one else would have. for it is written "the son of man goes as it is said of him" or something along those lines. but yeah. back to my point. (and this is very off topic) but weather some one goes to hell or not is between them and God. people cant look at some one and say they are going to hell. yep. any ways. LONG LIVE ROCK! *plays kicking riff on his guitar* later.

Nid-Naz

 

Just before any one gets mad, that was very childish of me to do the "long live rock" thing and I appologyse. even us youth can get carried away some times. ok. later noochies.

-Nid Naz

 

Odemus,
Are you looking for a song with no vocals or a song with no words?

 

The human voice can convey meaning without words.You would technically be correct if you gave me a tune that had a woman (or a man) moaning in a manner that implied something sexual or anything of that nature.But then as I think we would both agree, the moaning is where the meaning is expressed and where the sin is evident, not the music.

I was challenging you to provide a piece of music that expressed something sinful without vocals of any kind.

[ July 06, 2002, 01:28 AM: Message edited by: Odemus ]

 

I was simply arguing just one point of your aargument. However, a statement like that, no matter in what context is indefinitely left up to the interpretation of whoever reads it... I just happened to interprete it differently than what you meant. However, the truth about temptation is still the truth.

In Christ's gracious love,
Teresa

 

Aaron said:

...and if they are walking as natural men, then spiritual things to them are foolish.

Elementary.

Aaron, I am sure you know the difference between being a natural man, and being as a natural man.

In 1 Cor. 2:14, Paul is talking of the former.

Elementary.

But I'm finished discussing the topic with you.

Thank you, Aaron, I take this as a concession of defeat on your part.

Speaking of issues, the real issue is, and has always been, what is our authority? Is it the Scriptures, or something else? In your case, it can be plainly seen that it is always the latter, although in order to bolster your personal opinions and pseudo-science you have often paid lip-service to Scripture in the form of flimsy proof-texting.

Do you want to show that rock music is intrinsically evil? Fine - that is a moral and theological claim, so it is up to you to prove it from Scripture. That is what you have been challenged to do, many times. That is what you have failed to do, every time.

Do I take it personally when people pervert the Word of God for their own ends? Darn straight I do. It's a flat-out insult to the God I love and worship.

[ July 06, 2002, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

As the discussion has degenerated to personal jabs, (and I sadly admit my own guilt in this area) it's time to close it down.