Imagine if you will an Indonesian bushman we will call Fred. Fred has heard a strange message about Jesus and forgiveness of sin. An islander from a different tribe testified of the power of God being greater than that of the spirits, and he gave Fred a copy of the Bible that he had received from some foreign missionaries. Fred takes the Scripture portion home with him, as he journeys back to his home tribe. There isolated from almost any foreign influences, he comes to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, and a small band of believers emerges.
Now Fred has a New Testament with the Psalms. And in the Psalms, he finds numerous exhortations to sing to the Lord, and to sing a new song. So he and his fellow believing tribesman pick up their native instruments and start composing songs for their newfound Savior.
There is one problem with this story, though. Fred and his friends are singing songs with the same instrumentation and the same cultural sound as those they used to sing before they were converted. Indeed many tribes use that kind of music in their pagan rituals and songs to spirits. Isn’t the music then that Fred is using inherently evil? Doesn’t it have a morality of its own, independent of the wonderfully Christian words that Fred is using in his new songs?
Such is the question of morality and music. And here is my latest attempt at discussing this thorny topic. What follows is taken from a comment I recently made on my blog here, in response to yet another discussion about these very issues. At the end of this discussion, I’m going to return to the example mentioned above.
________________________________________________________
Music is amoral, because music is a creation, an entity — merely noise. But music is never used or created or employed by amoral people. People employ music for many different purposes, and as in everything people do, morality becomes a part of it.
How music becomes moral or immoral depends on the meaning of music. Just like there is nothing morally wrong with a rainbow colored bumper sticker, there is nothing morally wrong with any different style of music. Now a bumper sticker of the colors described above has taken on a meaning, and the meaning is quite specific. And for that reason I can judge the meaning as unquestionably immoral, and I would not put one on my car. Now with music, then, morality becomes a question of meaning.
So how much meaning is in music? I don’t argue that music has no meaning, it does. Apart from any lyrical context, without any words, and without any context, simple sounds or a simple music style does not have a specific enough meaning to become inherently moral or immoral, in my opinion. Add some words, add a context, the music increases in specificity and can clearly be inherently moral or immoral.
Yet even then, music is by nature subjective. Music inherently is more than just communication. It is more than just content or meaning. It is not mere prose, it is poetry given life. It is a spirit thing. Music is emotional, it is art yes, but more than mere art. It is something to be enjoyed. At the root, music is used because it is pleasing to listen to. We could all just recite the words to “How Great Thou Art” in unison. But that would not move us to the depths of our being as much as if we included a rich melody and harmony, and a supporting rhythm.
Now come questions of association, culture, and quality. Musicologists and philosophers wax eloquent, and traditionally charged presumptions and prejudices pull many into the fray. But it is precisely here that we must be most especially careful to look to Scripture. We find essential silence. Scripture never discusses the lasting qualities which make certain kinds of music inherently superior to others. Scripture doesn’t teach that certain associations make certain music styles inherently evil or unredeemable. Scripture never points out a specific cultural variety of music for our emulation. It merely encourages believers, gifted with the creativity God gave them, to employ all kinds of music in a way which captures the totality of our spirit and soul and mind in honest praise to God.
So to be frank, I don’t buy the arguments of musicologists on the superiority of classical music. There are plenty of other cultural varieties of music, and in other cultures believers looking to Scripture would not be pointed to an 18th century European musical theory book. I also don’t buy the argument that anything contemporary has been polluted by the beat which inspired rock “˜n roll. Sure there is much contemporary music crafted to encourage illicit sensual pleasures. But sensual pleasures are only wrong when enjoyed outside of the bounds God lays.
We are sensual, fleshly people. As such, we like to eat, and we need to sleep. We enjoy a pat on the back, and we like to kiss our wives/husbands. We laugh and cry. For many, any kind of music which appeals to their body is denounced as fleshly. If it makes my foot want to tap, it must be evil. Why is that? Because I like vanilla ice cream, should I be worried about catering to my flesh?
Now I grant that association can render some kinds of music style inappropriate for certain contexts, like worship services. But God wants us to redeem all of culture, and I believe that almost any musical style can be redeemed given a proper context.
________________________________________________________
Now then, let’s come back to the example of Fred, our converted bushman from Indonesia. Did you notice how it is the testimony of Scripture which compelled Fred to start writing songs and singing to God? If we stop for a moment and get honest with ourselves, we must agree that Scripture does not directly address the question of what kind of musical instrumentation or style believers such as Fred are to employ. What Scripture teaches by precept and example, is that all kinds of musical instruments and all kinds of emotions (often at the highest intensity) are to be used and felt during acceptable, God-honoring music. All of this is gleamed from the Psalms alone. And the Psalms also teach us to be physically expressive, we are to shout, clap our hands, raise our hands, even dance as we sing.
So I conclude by affirming that it would be wrong for a Westerner to enter Fred’s sphere and condemn Fred’s musical style. Fred’s music doesn’t need to be westernized to be spiritual. The music Fred is employing has taken on a new context, that of praise to God. Fred has the freedom and responsibility to redeem his musical culture and to offer sincere heartfelt praise to God.
Almost of all of this is entirely bogus, smacking of someone protecting his fleshly desires. I want to know where this doctrine of “redeeming our culture” comes from. I don’t see “redeeming our culture” anywhere in Scripture. We can’t take a sinful activity and make it unsinful. You don’t redeem, for instance, the attire of a harlot by writing John 3:16 on it. We should replace our culture with a Biblical one. God can redeem us, because we are redeemable. Certain of our behavior is worth keeping. Other of it is worthless activity that should be totally flushed.
I enjoyed your article and will apologize for the Kent. I’m not sure where he is coming from. Not sure he does either.
Glad the article was a blessing to you.
Bob
The concept of “Redeeming the Culture” comes from a little phrase called “All the Earth is the Lord’s & the Glory Thereof”. This means, that all keys, notes, tonalities, rhythms, melodies, instruments, and pitches are ALL THE LORDS! The only thing that isn’t the Lord’s, is any spirit (ie: Satan or the third of his demonic hosts) other than Himself. So, the Lord dances! He sings! He loves all different styles and rhythms. He’s not limited to the box of hymns that were created mostly by changing “drinking songs” into church hymns, so that the people could easily recognize them. By the way, does any individual in church history have more of a creative right than any other? No. In fact, our Creator, Abba-Father, inspires individual creativity in His Spirit that far exceeds any other spirit! – What separates music is the spirit or the Spirit. Primarily, we, as listeners, determine how we absorb ALL SENSORY INPUT! That means, that “To the pure in heart, all things are pure”, but to those who are moving by a force that is in opposition to God, then the opposite is happening. The listener is responsible, and music is amoral. – Now, with regard to secular music that was created in and by a spirit that opposes God – a Christian, through God’s Spirit, can reinterpret. This happens to me a lot! I hear a love song that was written and intended for one thing, but the Holy Spirit changes the meaning, and I find myself singing that same love song to God! Yes! And! God loves this!~
We totally agree. I think you will enjoy my post What is Christian Music?.
Good post, Bob! I think you will get a lot of comments from this one.
In response to Mr. Brandenberg, I’d like to make a couple of comments. First, we (being sinners) are not redeemable merely because we are ‘redeemable’ (read: able to reach out in faith by ourselves), but rather our redemption is purely of God’s grace (Ephesians 2:8 comes to mind here). Secondly, if Bob is attempting to justify fleshly desires, then it is incumbent upon Mr. Brandenberg to defend the notion of ‘worldly’ music being sinful– biblically, otherwise it is one’s own *personal* conviction to worship God with what kinds of music that one is comfortable with. Methinks that music in worship is something that is important to God, but nothing has been stated from Scripture as to *how* we make music in worship of God. Thirdly, I think that Mr. Brandenberg would have a somewhat valid point about our role (as Christians) to “redeem our culture”, but I think that Mr. Brandenberg has either misread or misrepresented Bob’s statement. Perhaps the reader should review Bob’s statement (in the last paragraph) that “Fred” has the freedom to redeem his *musical* culture through the kind of music Fred uses to worship God, not to actively convert the culture itself to conform to ‘nominal Christian belief’. This is a big difference, and I would hope that Bob would clarify this as well.
Bob, I’m with you 100% on this one.
I really don’t think I am “protecting my fleshly desires” but rather trying to “redeem” my fleshly desires. If I can’t have victory over the flesh, than I will just satisfy the flesh while trying to put a Christian veneer on it with “spiritual” lyrics. When I do this than my conscience is appeased while my flesh is satisfied. I’m sorry if this offends anyone, but this is really my main motivation for listening to and singing Christian Rock and Rap. I just thought I would be honest.
Larry, I didn’t misread Bob. He wrote:
“But God wants us to redeem all of culture, and I believe that almost any musical style can be redeemed given a proper context.”
You are correct that I didn’t say how we judge music. I wrote one relatively short comment. I’ve written a book on “how,” and I’m writing about 4 posts this month over at our http://www.jackhammr.org .
Kent,
I re-read Bob’s statement, and it is quoted as you stated. I’m willing to give Bob the shadow of a doubt as to the meaning of his perplexing statement that we (as Christians) should be out ‘redeeming our culture’. I’m thinking it’s also possible that his Covenantalist views on redemption (Amillennialism) may have colored this statement. Again, I’ll defer to Bob to clarify this, but for now I’m satisfied with his later statement in the last paragraph as explaining his first one that you have pointedly objected to. I would be guarded about our role as believers to ‘redeem our culture’, though, if this is what Bob meant.
I’m working on the “redemption” question here. But I don’t think that negates the main argument of my post. Scripture is silent on the specifics of music. Scripture commands music to be used. So using the music at hand, music that you can relate to and understand, using that music to worship God sincerely, is to be commended.
Okay, with respect to redeeming culture, we must remember the mandate in Gen. 1. We are called to exercise dominion and authority over the earth. We are to be creatures of this world, we are to think, create, and shape the world we live in. Culture is the result of this.
All of creation has been marred with sin, and so has all the cultures of men. But as believers, we are to be living the Christian life out in the sphere of culture. We are to extend Christ’s rule through all spheres of life.
Granted not every specific thing is redeemable, but that is not exactly what I meant. When things that are created by fallen men, as a result of God’s freedom and common grace given to them, they in a sense fulfill this mandate in Gen. 1. And when we build on those things and help fallen men see the lordship of Christ through them, by directing them to God, we in a sense redeem those aspects of culture.
Our primary responsibility is to be loving the Lord and living a pure and holy life. Part of this surely is to spread the gospel to every creature, but part of this is to live a holy life where we are. God is pleased when a plumber does his job well, and models the ideals God had in mind in Gen. 1 in front of a lost world.
With respect to the attire of a harlot, a very similar if not identical attire is redeemed in a proper way within the sacredness of the bed chamber of a married man and woman. To ascribe morality to things in and of themselves is to slip into sort of a dualistic view where fleshly, material things are evil and spiritual, ethereal things are holy. All too often we tend to think Christians should only live in the religious sphere of life, and not become polluted by too much enjoyment of or involvement in the natural, material life. Such is a misconception.
I contend that music almost always is a cultural expression which can be harnessed and used for good ends. It can be enjoyed as to the Lord.
Christ is Lord of All, and he made us physical people. He gave us the command to watch over this earth and to rule and use it for God glorifying purposes.
I don’t buy into the whole idea of Christians needing to legislate morality to the end of establishing a Theocracy. I often think a Christian attachment to politics and other matters is misguided and wrong. Our allegiance is to the Kingdom of Christ, but we are also members of separate kingdoms (nations) here below. We are to live in a way that magnifies Christ in all the spheres of life.
I admit I need to do more study in this area, but this is my general idea behind that statement in my post. Again even if I were to temper that statement a bit, it does not negate the full force of my argument.
I found the following articles helpful in this regard, and you might too.
“Christianity and Culture” by J. Gresham Machen
“Christian Discernment 202: Pop Culture: Why Bother?” by Dennis Haack
“Why the Mona Lisa Is Going to Heaven: God’s Cultural Mandate” by Greg Johnson
“Christianity, Culture, and Common Grace” by Kenneth Myers (I’m not finished with this yet, but it is very good. He discusses fundamentalism in all of this too.)
Seeker,
I appreciated your article.
Blessings,
Bob
Larry,
I don’t think we should convert culture to a “nominal Christian belief”. Let me make that clear. I think we should be creative and we should engage the culture. We can use the good things of culture and try to better other things, all with the goal of living out in an incarnational way, our Christianity. Certainly this is not to the exclusion of a verbal witness, by the way.
Still thinking through some of these things, but I don’t think you and I are separated by too much of a gulf here.
Blessings,
Bob
Don,
I really don’t think I am “protecting my fleshly desires†but rather trying to “redeem†my fleshly desires. If I can’t have victory over the flesh, than I will just satisfy the flesh while trying to put a Christian veneer on it with “spiritual†lyrics. When I do this than my conscience is appeased while my flesh is satisfied. I’m sorry if this offends anyone, but this is really my main motivation for listening to and singing Christian Rock and Rap. I just thought I would be honest.
Not sure what exactly you are getting at. I think you might be saying that if you want to listen to pop music, you as a Christian would prefer to listen to Christian pop music in an attempt to continue to direct all your thoughts to Christ. In that sense i agree with you. Again, there is nothing wrong with desires of the flesh in the sense of mere human desires. Like everything we need to be wise in how we fulfill them, but a human desire for steak more so than for chicken is not wrong. Desires for one recreational activity over another is not wrong. So desiring one kind of music over another is not wrong either. The purposeful use of only explicitly Christian lyrics in your music, is just a way you are going about your particular spiritual life. You think doing so will help you spiritually. To be frank, I do basically the same thing. I’d rather fill my time with music in things explicitly praising my Savior.
Anyways, thanks for the support.
Blessings from the Cross,
Bob
I think that one of the mistakes that modern fundamentalists (and traditional ones) have made is confusing modernity with worldliness. Also, having an almost entirely negative theology of the body, and a low view of man’s natural soulical abilities (will, intellect, emotions), they inherently mistrust these.
In Ten Principles of Biblical Discernment I remarked:
Bob,
No, we don’t live very far apart, at least not at the size of a gulf (or, Gulf of Mexico, which is only a few miles from my home). Thanks for the clarification on the matter, though. I was not sure if you held to some kind of “Christian Reconstructionism” or Preterism that some Covenantalists may hold to. This may affect one’s views on music as well, but it seems that in many cases, like yours and mine, it doesn’t. I think your ‘theology’ of music can withstand some more refinement, as it is far better than the vain philosophy that we both were taught as ‘fundamentalists’.
Thanks for addressing this topic, Bob. I’ve personally struggled with the notion of “fleshly desires” and what that means. Obviously, anything my flesh wants to do that is strictly forbidden in Scripture could fall into that catagory, but unfortunately, it seems “fleshly desires” becomes the derogatory term to explain anything that appeals to my body.
Am I too far off base to compare that teaching with the heresy that all matter is evil? (Is that gnosticism? I might be mistaken)
Either way, I cannot understand how pleasing my flesh in a non-sinful indulgence (i.e. eating a really good steak) is wrong. If listening to CCM (or whatever you want to call it) causes you to sin in impure thoughts or actions, than by all means avoid it at all costs! However, I have found that that exact music can calm my spirit and point me to Christ, and I can’t imagine why my flesh would be sinning when I listen and enjoy the sound or beat of the music as well.
Bob,
Sorry for posting a completely sarcastic comment without making it evident that I was being sarcastic. 🙂 I wanted to see if anyone else would take me seriously and you did, which wasn’t my intent. I appreciate your effort in trying to give a serious, reasoned response. But you were exactly right when you couldn’t figure out what I was getting at.
It is totally bogus for anyone to claim that they know your motivations and that your motivations must be “carnal” for you to like and promote certain styles of music. That was really what I was trying to say in a very sarcastic manner.
Don,
That’s kind of what I thought. I just wasn’t sure, and wanted to intervene before someone else got the wrong idea.
Thanks, Donette,
That brings up a good point. If contemporary Christian music is all about catering to the flesh, than we should expect to see some kind of negative fruit from listening to it. Almost everyone I talk to does not report a growth in a feeling of rebellion or loosing of morals from listening to that music. They instead bear witness to an increased heart for the Lord.
Like it or not, we are products of our age. The music of 100 years ago was very moving and engaging to the people of its era. But such music doesn’t really grip me and move me in the same way. Today’s Christian contemporary music can really identify with me and hits me square between the eyes. There are several songs which have catapulted me into worship like nothing I’ve ever experienced with the songs of yesteryear.
So we can judge music by its fruit. This is not to say the end justifies the means, necessarily. But it is to say “by [its] fruits you will know [it]”.
Yes, I think you can compare that idea with Gnosticism, too. Obviously a lessened form of it, though. It is part of a dualist mentality, that things of the physical world are all evil, and we should only concern ourselves with spiritual things. The article by Ken Myers I link to above has some excellent things to say about this whole issue.
Thanks for stopping by, again Donette.
Blessings to you and yours,
Bob
Larry,
I’m no reconstructionist! I think our practice is quite similar, although as we develop in our theology and view of culture, we may find some differences. But if there were no differences, life would be so boring!
Blessings from the cross,
Bob
Seeker,
Thanks for the links and the fascinating historical details about the Salvation Army. I think if you study the methods of the great evangelists of that day, they purposefully used “cutting-edge” music. The music appealed to the miners and lower classes, because they could relate to it and understand it much better than the stoic high church music.
Again, thanks for engaging in the discussion here.
Blessings,
Bob
Bob in normal font, mine in bold.
Okay, with respect to redeeming culture, we must remember the mandate in Gen. 1. We are called to exercise dominion and authority over the earth. We are to be creatures of this world, we are to think, create, and shape the world we live in. Culture is the result of this.
The culture of unredeemed, depraved humanity is NOT the result of obedience to the Lord’s command.
All of creation has been marred with sin, and so has all the cultures of men. But as believers, we are to be living the Christian life out in the sphere of culture. We are to extend Christ’s rule through all spheres of life.
I don’t see how this relates to the issue at all, except to fillibuster.
Granted not every specific thing is redeemable, but that is not exactly what I meant. When things that are created by fallen men, as a result of God’s freedom and common grace given to them, they in a sense fulfill this mandate in Gen. 1. And when we build on those things and help fallen men see the lordship of Christ through them, by directing them to God, we in a sense redeem those aspects of culture.
This is a HUGE s-t-r-e-t-c-h. We are not to learn the way of the heathen. God doesn’t tell us to redeem their way of life, their view of the world. When people receive Christ, they become new creatures with a new song (the song is said to become “new” more than any other feature of salvation).
Our primary responsibility is to be loving the Lord and living a pure and holy life. Part of this surely is to spread the gospel to every creature, but part of this is to live a holy life where we are. God is pleased when a plumber does his job well, and models the ideals God had in mind in Gen. 1 in front of a lost world.
You have introduced me to a new doctrine that I have never seen before. What I think you are saying is that music is a “having dominion over the earth” activity akin to “plumbing,” so that just like newly converted plumbers are now redeeming their plumbing, newly justified musicians are now redeeming their music. This sounds quite Arminian for someone who is reformed. A better analogy is that when we are converted God redeems our mouth by changing our language and he also redeems our music by changing it to something not like the way of the heathen.
With respect to the attire of a harlot, a very similar if not identical attire is redeemed in a proper way within the sacredness of the bed chamber of a married man and woman. To ascribe morality to things in and of themselves is to slip into sort of a dualistic view where fleshly, material things are evil and spiritual, ethereal things are holy. All too often we tend to think Christians should only live in the religious sphere of life, and not become polluted by too much enjoyment of or involvement in the natural, material life. Such is a misconception.
Let’s make this more simple. My body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, so I don’t wear ungodly things any more. My body is not evil (your ying-yang reference above), depending upon HOW I USE IT. If I use cloth in the wrong way, that physical thing becomes evil and should be destroyed. The same should be said of ungodly music and idols.
I contend that music almost always is a cultural expression which can be harnessed and used for good ends. It can be enjoyed as to the Lord.
Notes, melody, harmony, and rhythm can all be used for God’s glory or for Satan or man. We do choose how we will use those. Music itself must be acceptable to God, however, not conformed to the world and not fleshly. There is a right culture and a wrong culture. The right culture will also have the right music.
It’s obvious that Pastor Brandenburg and I are disagreeing. The main point of this post is that depending on the Scripture alone will not lead one to conclude that a Eurocentric, classical musical style is alone adequate for singing songs to God.
If one is going to claim as Brandenburg does that certain music is “ungodly” or “wrong”. Then we must be able to look to the Scripture and see that explicitly taught. It must be a clear teaching from Scripture. If not, we are left with individual applications of principles, and a command in Rom. 14 to get along with other believers though they may differ with us on the particulars of how they use music, as how they distinguish (or not) days or how they use various foods/drinks.
Further, as I have stated before, there is no distinctly Christian style of music, so therefore there is no music choice you can make to be now having new songs that are “not like the way of the heathen”. The heathen gave us Classical and Baroque, they also gave us Jazz and Rock, they also give us Cuban music and African music, and everything in between.
I won’t belabor the point here. Again, as I mentioned in the post on 10 points on the music issue (where Brandenburg and I are debating currently as well), we have already had this debate in great detail here. So if anyone is interested, they can follow the exchange there as well.
It isn’t as simple as who wrote what music. Ungodly people can make modest forms of dress that fit with Scriptural principles. The music should be rid of attributes that are not fitting with the character of God. We know what God’s character is and we know what aspects and styles of music communicate. We reject the aspects and styles that do not fit with His character.
Bob,
I am completely convinced that Christians have a biblical mandate to redeem our culture. The Bible most certainly does teach this important doctrine. Those who think otherwise–I would argue–have grossly misunderstood the nature of the Gospel and the nature of the Kingdom (sadly, all too common among those who hold to the newly invented system of Dispensationalism). Jesus announced his coming Kingdom, and then commissioned his disciples to likewise preach the coming of the kingdom. John the Baptist, when preaching to the crowds, exhorts them to repent and submit themselves to God. He then gives a few concrete examples of what this might look like. He tells the tax collectors and the soldiers to reform the manner of which they carry out their duties. This is so much more than simply “getting saved”, it is a life system.
The only way to deny the mandate to redeem culture is to deny (1) the doctrine of the Kingdom, and (2) the doctrine of Imago Deo, particularly as expressed in the creation account, and (3) to reduce the Gospel to its most naive and simplistic expressions. Also, I believe this denial stems from a less than biblical understanding of discipleship. Disciples are to ‘follow the master’, meaning we live as Jesus lived, teach as he taught, and do what he did. While there is a categorical difference between Jesus and man, we are still to engage in the activities in which he engaged. Jesus took sin and made it holy–as evidenced in the life of every believer. Yes, disciples have the mandate to take sinful culture, and through the power of the cross and the ongoing work of the Spirit, to redeem it and make it holy before the Father.
Furthermore, those who argue against “redeeming” culture are also the same types who argue fiercely that America needs to be restored once again to a “Christian nation”–and lament the demise of our “Christian” roots. Within that line of thinking is the belief–and admiration for–those Christian founding fathers who at least attempted to redeem/create the early American culture.
Josh,
I pretty much agree with you.
I think Larry is objecting along the lines of our primary goal being to reform culture versus spread the gospel. I think its both. We need to help the poor and spread the gospel, and live lives that represent Christ. Certainly we are to live out the kingdom and that in and of itself transforms culture.
I guess what I’m saying, and what you would agree with is this: as Christians live out their lives in a holy and radical way, and as they live in the culture God has placed them in, they will be redeeming and transforming that culture. God doesn’t call Christians to a life of counterculturalism, necessarily. He calls them to live out a supernatural life where they are. Of course there are aspects to culture which are sinful indeed, and as Christians we need to be salt in those areas.
Thanks for coming by and adding your perspective.
Blessings from the Cross of Jesus,
Bob
Josh,
Respectfully, you provide no verses for “redeeming the culture,” and I do believe I understand the kingdom. Today Jesus rules His kingdom through the church in the midst of His enemies (see Psalm 110, the most quoted psalm in the NT). They are enemies. The world is not going to be the believer’s friend…ever. Satan is the prince of this world until Jesus redeems it. What Jesus required, like He did Israel, was separation from the world (Mt. 10; Jn. 17). The changes occur through the gospel. We preach the gospel to every creature and when people receive it, they are become part of the kingdom of God presently spiritually (John 3:3) and someday in a literal physical kingdom that the Lord Jesus Christ will usher on this earth (Rev. 20). You can say “image of God” in Latin or French or Spanish, but the image of God in man was ruined by the fall and the Gospel is the only return to the moral likeness that God created man. The Gospel is countercultural.
I can’t say I understand your concept of discipleship. Making disciples requires justification, baptism (essentially associating with Christ and His body visibly), and learning and obeying all the things that He commanded us (Matt. 28:18-20), which is sanctification (John 17:17-19). Following Jesus Christ means that the world will hate you (John 15; 1 John 3). That’s what Jesus said. And Bob, Jesus does call us to a life of counter-culturalism. Jesus was light come into a dark world, exposing the darkness (that’s counter-cultural; see John 1 and 3). Jesus chose us out of the world and the world hates us. We are not conformed to this world. The Holy Spirit is come to reprove the world. The world hates us because we are not of this world. That’s counter cultural.
Culture simply is a way of life. Your message of fitting into the culture is flat wrong.
Kent,
Correct. We are not to be conformed to this world, nor are we to fit into this culture. That is not my message. In fact, I’m not even sure how you got that out of my post. Where did I say we must “fit into” culture? Yes, culture is the enemy of God–which is why it needs redemption.
Redeeming culture is about conforming culture to Christ, not conforming ourselves to culture (that is called “paganism”, not redemption).
Yes, the image of God was distorted by the Fall. But Christians are being remade in the image of Christ.
Your mention of the word “counterculture” is very important–and I agree completely. The very idea of redeeming culture is itself countercultural. I am in no way suggesting culture will go along with the program. In fact, it will strongly resist and fight against it because of its hatred for the things of God. Christianity is countercultural IN THE SENSE THAT IT DOES NOT CONFORM ITSELF TO THE SINFUL PRACTICES OF CULTURE, AND ACTIVELY SEEKS TO BRING CULTURE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST. The redemption of culture is true counterculture.
I have to ask you the question: “What is the Gospel?” Is it just the plan of salvation? Or is it the message that Jesus is Lord? Of course, it is the latter. THAT is the good news. The good news isn’t heaven, or salvation, or justification (though these are part of the good news). The good news is the declaration that Jesus is Lord and we owe him our allegiance. Individuals need to be transformed by this good news, as well as entire societies.
Josh,
When someone receives Christ, the Lord justifies, sanctifies, and then glorifies. He keeps on saving, which means we conform to the image of His Son. God has predestined that. So we conform to Him miraculously by His grace. Will that impact the culture? Sure.
Good thoughts here, Josh. My hesitation with “counterculture” is that just because we are Christians doesn’t mean we need to create our totally distinct culture become Amish or something. We do reject the sinful elements of culture, and engage it as we try to transform it and bring it under Christ’s rule.
I add a hearty “Amen” to your post.
Thanks for the time to enter the discussion.
Blessings,
Bob
The usage of Amish is a regular strawman.
Um, yeah. I was making a point. The Amish would be an extreme all could agree on. I wasn’t erecting a strawman.
Amish is a strawman because they add works to grace for salvation. They are not an example of a Christian counterculture. Question: What is engaging culture?
We can use the good things of culture and try to better other things, all with the goal of living out in an incarnational way, our Christianity.
I think this is one point of misunderstanding among Christians. Some view culture as entirely debased, being rooted in humanity. But I think that they are making the mistake of assuming that all of culture is wicked. Some of culture is entirely benign, and based upon such things as weather and availability of food. And music, even if based on fleshly pleasure, is not necessarily any more debased than the healthy desire for food and sex.
When we talk of redeeming the culture, what we are really doing is “holding fast to what is good” while rejecting the unbibilcal VALUES and PRACTICES of culture. The FORMS of culture will largely be benign, if not positive.
I also think that when we talk of redeeming the culture, we ARE talking about Christianizing it, but also realizing that this work, while bettering mankind and perhaps helping to usher in the Kingdom (depending on your school of theology), will be at best imperfect until “the perfect has come,” which is Jesus’s second return.
Affecting culture with Christian truth is part of our obedience to taking all thoughts captive to Christ. We must think and act in all areas of life, including music and culture, in a Christian manner, and encourage others to do so as well.
While separationists and isolationists will call this work “polishing brass on a sinking ship,” their own isolationist theology is allowing others in the world culture they ignore suffer, deny avenues to the gospel, and allow hell to reign in public life.
Kent Brandeburg own’d your face fundyreformed!
WOO!
Now ima go listen to CCM to celebrate the victory.
In reality, all of this in favor of CCM is bogus. Bob’s primary point about the Indonesian bushman called Fred worshipping God with the music he had been using for idols is clearly contrary to Scripture by pattern and by principle.
By pattern, Elijah at Mount Carmel did not offer sacrifices on the altar of Baal, or use means dedicated to Baal for worship of Jehovah. Instead he repaired the altar that was dedicated to Jehovah that was already present and worshipped on that. By principle, the Law says that one is not to bring the price of a dog or the hire of a harlot into the house of the Lord for it is an abomination to Him. The money used for sin cannot be given to God under any circumstances. But, money is amoral — it can be used for good things like paying tithes, taxes, bills, etc. However, it can also be used for sin, such as going to the whore-house. Yet, what was given for sin cannot be given to God — sacrifices to Jehovah must be without spot and blemish. Therefore, music dedicated to Satan cannot be dedicated to God. Rock music (among the many sinful genres) is the devil’s music, according to Satanic rocker Mick Jagger, and CCM of any sort is, in his words, “stealing from Satan.”
As to it just being part of Fred’s culture, that argument takes some primary considerations: first, only culture based on Scripture is acceptible culture. Culture infected with sin is evil. Example: it is perfectly acceptible for people in some bush-tribes to go about wearing only tattoos, but that does not make it morally right. Therefore, Bob and those who side with him have no standing-ground. Also, Jesus said that new wine cannot be poured into old wineskins because the old skins will burst and the wine will be lost: Christianity cannot be practiced with the old method of worship.
As to the argument that belief in moral-immoral music being dualistic, the opposite is truth. How can something historically dedicated to sin be good? To say that rock music (dedicated to evil) can be used for good is dualism at its lowest. However, as western logic is linear, that which is evil is not good, nor can man perceive something that is evil to be good.
Finaly, Bob, your use of CCM as a hyper-Calvinist is rather ironic because Calvin stripped all the churches of Geneva of all their music, instruments, and harmony, leaving only the unaccompanied (a-capella) Psalter with everybody singing melody. I do not think that he would be in favor of such worldly innovations as CCM, considering that it was because of worldly innovations in his day that he did such a house-cleaning.
Wow, Shetland. You covered the bases.
I think you came up short, however.
Elijah and Carmel is not pattern. There is express law about how to build altars. There is no express law about which musical styles are acceptable.
Mick Jagger has an opinion, but does he officially represent the music itself? Has all rock music been officially dedicated to Satan? You say “culture infected with sin is evil”. But all culture is infected with sin. Sinful people create the culture we share. The world is marred by the Fall.
How do we know which practices to avoid and which not to? The Bible. Nowhere does the Bible teach that things the world does is bad, simply because they do them. Scripture tells us to avoid lasciviousness and lust and etc.
For some, this might mean avoiding all rock music. But this is not a Scriptural rule. Music of this world must be judged according to Scripture. The fruit of much CCM music and praise and worship, is good. By your fruits you shall know them.
Classical and Baroque music styles are as “of the world” as rock, jazz and the like. They can be sensual or not, sinful or not. Music by itself does not convey meaning with enough specificity to be overtly morally wrong in most instances. Music, like art, weaves pattern, specific colors/sounds, notes/strokes, style, and artful intent/lyrical content together into a homogenous entity. You have to judge each picture independently, you can’t simply accept all Realist paintings, as many have explicit nudity which should be frowned upon from a Scriptural perspective. You can’t reject all modern art out of hand, simply because you don’t understand the meaning the artist is trying to convey, but certainly some modern art contains overt sensuality or purposeful wickedness (cross in urine, etc.). Same goes for music, each piece and work must be judged. There is something to be said for association, but generally each piece should be judged independently. On this front, some CCM might fail the test, but much of it doesn’t. It clearly is not intended to, nor does it convey, sexuality. To those who understand and appreciate the musical style/genre.
Church history is important. Pattern and principle is more so. As Christians we must be careful, however, not to make judgments where Scripture is silent. Does the teaching concerning singing a “new song” require our bushman Fred to create a whole new musical genre and sound? Or can he reclaim his native genre and put it to a different, new use? Can he add intent and lyrical content to the style and use it from a pure heart in obedience to Scripture? Where in Scripture would he be given instruction as to which styles of music are acceptable and why the music he is most familiar with should be treated as evil in and of itself?
I thank you for your interactions, and desire for Scripture to be followed.
Blessings in Christ,
Bob Hayton
Bob,
I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts on the music issue, as well as other posts on this blog. I’ve addressed similar things on my blog regarding the moralness or “worldliness” of certain music types. Keep up the good work and looking forward to reading more.
Stephen
Thanks Stephen for the encouragement. I’ll have to subscribe to your blog and check it out.
Blessings,
Bob Hayton
This is such a huge topic, I pray that God would give me clarity into what is acceptable to him regarding music. Certainly there is a use for music. I believe Satan could distort that use just as he distorted the very word of God to decieve.
Could it be that God would redeem someone in the hip-hop/rap culture and then arm that person with hip-hop/rap music with the Gospel message and send him back in to be a witness for those who God has called and chosen within that culture? It may be a good evangelistic tool to be an entry point into the kingdom for some steeped in that lifestyle.
I remember paul in scripture saying “I have become all things to all people… that I may win some”
I am praying about this topic, I think that we need to be careful to do that which is good and of good report in all that we do, but to avoid music altogether doesn’t seem right either.
Good thoughts, Michael. I know of several reformed Christian brothers who are using the music of their past lifestyle (rap), to reach the lost and other Christians. They have a completely radical message of the glory of Christ, but use the medium of rap music. Anyone who has actually heard the music of Lecrae, Shai Linne, Timothy Brindle, (Lampmode records and Reach records) for example, can attest that they are using the medium in a God-honoring way.