Is the rock beat / rock music sinful?

[Mr. Great-Heart]

I'm still mystified by the purely lyrics-based litmus test that seems to be advocated by some posts on this thread. Here's a couple of additional questions to consider, and I'll even focus it to merely assessing any given specific artist, not genre.

For most of history, music was not something listened to with the isolation and self-terminating enjoyment that personal ear buds provide. It still can be, and often is, however, a community experience and perhaps finds its ultimate expression in live shows, concerts, performances, etc. So what type of climate is generally found at a concert of the artist we are listening to?

Does a live performance from this artist (whether living and actively performing, or what we can discern from records of past decades.. obviously we don't have the data to answer this question universally but I think we can find things at least in the realm of the OP) generally lead to honor, purity, love, and excellence in behavior, dress, etc? Whatever the answer, is there a difference between the songs that have lyrics that we would object to and not, or is it the pervasive influence of all the material? How do the performers behave during the concert? Do they change their behavior based on the lyrics being sung? Same goes for the average concert goer.. what is their frame of mind during the concert, one of peace, or disorder?

Whatever the responses are, is this something we want to influence our personality? There is a spiritual aspect to music, regardless of lyrics (or lack thereof), as we see in 1 Samuel 16:23 and 2 Kings 3:15, as a couple of examples.

 

[Polanus1561]

I'm still mystified by the purely lyrics-based litmus test that seems to be advocated by some posts on this thread. Here's a couple of additional questions to consider, and I'll even focus it to merely assessing any given specific artist, not genre.

For most of history, music was not something listened to with the isolation and self-terminating enjoyment that personal ear buds provide. It still can be, and often is, however, a community experience and perhaps finds its ultimate expression in live shows, concerts, performances, etc. So what type of climate is generally found at a concert of the artist we are listening to?

Does a live performance from this artist (whether living and actively performing, or what we can discern from records of past decades.. obviously we don't have the data to answer this question universally but I think we can find things at least in the realm of the OP) generally lead to honor, purity, love, and excellence in behavior, dress, etc? Whatever the answer, is there a difference between the songs that have lyrics that we would object to and not, or is it the pervasive influence of all the material? How do the performers behave during the concert? Do they change their behavior based on the lyrics being sung? Same goes for the average concert goer.. what is their frame of mind during the concert, one of peace, or disorder?

Whatever the responses are, is this something we want to influence our personality? There is a spiritual aspect to music, regardless of lyrics (or lack thereof), as we see in 1 Samuel 16:23 and 2 Kings 3:15, as a couple of examples.

No sarcasm here but I would love it if you can disclose what music you listen to and how you arrived to the conclusion that it is approved by the principles you have outlined so far.

 

[Mr. Great-Heart]

No sarcasm here but I would love it if you can disclose what music you listen to and how you arrived to the conclusion that it is approved by the principles you have outlined so far.

If You Love Me by Judy Rogers, on CD

 

[Phil D.]

For reference

If You Love Me, by Judy Rogers

 

[Polanus1561]

This is good.

 

[Pergamum]

I'm still mystified by the purely lyrics-based litmus test that seems to be advocated by some posts on this thread. Here's a couple of additional questions to consider, and I'll even focus it to merely assessing any given specific artist, not genre.

For most of history, music was not something listened to with the isolation and self-terminating enjoyment that personal ear buds provide. It still can be, and often is, however, a community experience and perhaps finds its ultimate expression in live shows, concerts, performances, etc. So what type of climate is generally found at a concert of the artist we are listening to?

Does a live performance from this artist (whether living and actively performing, or what we can discern from records of past decades.. obviously we don't have the data to answer this question universally but I think we can find things at least in the realm of the OP) generally lead to honor, purity, love, and excellence in behavior, dress, etc? Whatever the answer, is there a difference between the songs that have lyrics that we would object to and not, or is it the pervasive influence of all the material? How do the performers behave during the concert? Do they change their behavior based on the lyrics being sung? Same goes for the average concert goer.. what is their frame of mind during the concert, one of peace, or disorder?

Whatever the responses are, is this something we want to influence our personality? There is a spiritual aspect to music, regardless of lyrics (or lack thereof), as we see in 1 Samuel 16:23 and 2 Kings 3:15, as a couple of examples.

I agree that lyrics are not the end-all-be-all to our judgments. The beat and music itself is important. But this is subjective.

Example: The circus song that clowns dance to (doop doop doodoo doodoo doop doop doodoo...) has no lyrics, but we would all agree that this song would not be a good fit at a funeral.

 

[Phil D.]

The circus song that clowns dance to

A little too much doodoo for my liking...

 

[Joshua]

It's practically the devil, equally applied to all creatures without distinction, no room for nuance or thought. No care to take with regard to one's temperaments, corruptions, past, etc. Just plain ole the DEVIL.

 

[Mr. Great-Heart]

This is good.

Maybe try asking me again during a time of my life when I don't have young children. In the meantime, I guess this thread is consigned to mostly sweeping generalizations on one side or the other.

 

[Joshua]

In the meantime, I guess this thread is consigned to mostly sweeping generalizations on one side or the other.

It does seem that way, doesn't it, Brother? Many such cases under a magnifying glass on the world wide web, too.

On the one hand, we mustn't make doctrines out of the commandments of men. On the other hand, we must understand that there are some things in this life, which -otherwise being neutral- are not neutral to all people without exception. Men must known themselves. Men must know God & His Law. Men must apply this Law to their consciences, inside and out. Men must sometimes do the difficult work of hewing out those rough edges where things that may to others be lawful are not lawful to themselves, because they've a particular appetite that tends to corruption, or a particular infirmity that makes them need a hedge others may not need. This is a difficult work, but a necessary work.

 

[JH]

Anecdotal, but for what it's worth, I think certain music can be demonic even without lyrics. Dark ambient music, for example, is not exactly the most pleasing thing to listen to. e.g. horror movie OST

 

[SeanPatrickCornell]

Here is a cool link:

Megadeth bassist studying in seminary

Unfortunately Megadeth's now former bassist had taken a turn for the worse. He was kicked out of the band because of sexual sin.

That's something you don't hear of every day: A heavy metal band kicking a member out for being immoral.

 

[Pergamum]

Unfortunately Megadeth's now former bassist had taken a turn for the worse. He was kicked out of the band because of sexual sin.

That's something you don't hear of every day: A heavy metal band kicking a member out for being immoral.

Do you have a link? This is a GOOD thing... the band has standards..... usually bands brag about such sins. And sexual sin is a sin of weakness and not of outright rebellion usually, and so there is hope. I hope for the best. It is probably harder to be a famous guitarist and stay pure than being an ugly church man with zero charm, after all.

 

[Mr. Great-Heart]

It does seem that way, doesn't it, Brother? Many such cases under a magnifying glass on the world wide web, too.

On the one hand, we mustn't make doctrines out of the commandments of men. On the other hand, we must understand that there are some things in this life, which -otherwise being neutral- are not neutral to all people without exception. Men must known themselves. Men must know God & His Law. Men must apply this Law to their consciences, inside and out. Men must sometimes do the difficult work of hewing out those rough edges where things that may to others be lawful are not lawful to themselves, because they've a particular appetite that tends to corruption, or a particular infirmity that makes them need a hedge others may not need. This is a difficult work, but a necessary work.

I've seen plenty of threads on this forum where edges are hewn and hairs are split. That is one of the reasons some replies to this thread, regarding such a powerful force such as music, are surprising to me.

 

[Polanus1561]

I've seen plenty of threads on this forum where edges are hewn and hairs are split. That is one of the reasons some replies to this thread, regarding such a powerful force such as music, are surprising to me.

I don’t know if you are targeting this at me, but my diagnostic questions were not meant to be the be all and end all of this complicated topic. But anyway I don’t wish to discuss this topic any further here.

Peace.

 

[Mr. Great-Heart]

I don’t know if you are targeting this at me, but my diagnostic questions were not meant to be the be all and end all of this complicated topic. But anyway I don’t wish to discuss this topic any further here.

Peace.

I wasn't thinking of any one poster, and my questions were not meant to be - and certainly are not - the be all and end all either. Some areas are subjective, and some are not. Anyway, hopefully at least you've benefited from your diagnostic questions by having Judy Rogers added to your music library.

 

[No Other Name]

I've seen plenty of threads on this forum where edges are hewn and hairs are split. That is one of the reasons some replies to this thread, regarding such a powerful force such as music, are surprising to me.

It may help to track your memory of the board over time so as to guard against weighing individual posts against a nebulous collective consensus that has formed in your mind as to the board as a whole. One post at a time, one person at a time may alleviate some of your surprise.

^ Merely two cents of nothing in a vacuum here.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

I realized at that point that atonal music—which characterized much of the nonsense of the twentieth century—while perhaps not inherently sinful, was undoubtedly rooted in rebellion against God's created order. The sad thing is that I, as an image bearer, had the equipment to discern this: atonal music, for the most part, is positively ugly, a fact I was unwilling to admit in the years of my musical snobbery. There is a reason atonal music is ugly. It is unnatural. Now, there is a place for pushing the boundaries of tonality. Richard Wagner did it to significant effect. His opera Tristan und Isolde is four hours of utter musical suspense, the resolution of which does not arrive until the final minute or two. He pushed the boundaries but did so within the framework of the natural order of things.

Great post, Taylor; thanks for it.

I'd thought about something along these lines but don't have the personal experience that you describe: the snobbish embrace of the atonal (I can be snobbish about my love of the tonal!).

I think it's right to say that atonal is not inherently sinful (as a product) but rooted in rebellion. I think music history and literature illustrate this.

I also very much agree that Wagner pushes these boundaries (utterly brilliantly in my opinion) and that's why I so love him, Bruckner, Mahler, et al. [Perhaps also because I am a trombonist and love to hear the brass of the CSO play this literature!]. Here's a little article that some might find interesting: https://www.opc.org/nh.html?article_id=937.

Thanks also so much for citing the Bernstein Harvard lectures. There's nothing that I know that is like them. Yes, Lenny is so full of himself but marvelously brilliant as a music educator (unparalleled in lay instruction in my opinion). For any here who wants a great introduction to all this, with their children, those Young People's Concerts Bernstein did with the NYP are still fantastic (My children and I watched all these together and they remark upon it still!).

Peace,
Alan

 

[SeanPatrickCornell]

Do you have a link? This is a GOOD thing... the band has standards..... usually bands brag about such sins. And sexual sin is a sin of weakness and not of outright rebellion usually, and so there is hope. I hope for the best. It is probably harder to be a famous guitarist and stay pure than being an ugly church man with zero charm, after all.

Yep, here's the link.

Megadeth fires bassist David Ellefson amid allegations of sexual misconduct

Frontman Dave Mustaine wrote on Twitter that the band was parting ways with co-founder David Ellefson following a series of online allegations.

www.latimes.com

 

[alexandermsmith]

I feel like this idea is not biblical though because (1) "everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving" (1 Tim 4:4). Based on this I would say there's nothing inherently sinful about any particular melody or beat or whatever.

Yesterday I read that the tabernacle and the ark had designs that had Egyptian origins/style. But does it matter? No, of course, for everything is the LORD’s.

This discussion is a good example of how these texts are so grossly misapplied. The creatures to which Paul is referring in 1 Timothy 4:4 are those which were created by God Himself (as we see from the preceding verses). The only music of which Scripture speaks approvingly is that which comprises God's worship: the singing of psalms and the playing of instruments in accompaniment. Instruments, however, as typological of, and therefore inferior to, the spiritual praise of the regenerated soul and contrite heart, were restricted to the place of typological worship, the temple. The music being discussed in this thread is not that which has been created by God but by man and therefore, while that does not automatically make it sinful, it cannot all simply be called good. There is a connection here with the regulative principle of worship: the only music permitted is that of a cappella singing of psalms; the only instrument permitted, the human voice. This music and this instrument being both created by God they are the only music and instrument permitted in His worship. Man-made instruments, man-made music and man-made songs are not permitted because they constitute will-worship, substituting man's creation for God's.

As for Psalm 24:1, indeed Paul uses this text to defend Christian liberty in the eating of meats. Again, though, we are talking about creatures created by God, not man. The text in question is referring to the Creation, not to that which man has formed. To apply this text in the way it is being applied in this discussion, in a consistent manner, would be to argue that anything whatsoever found within the world is the Lord's and therefore to be made use of by Christians. Well sin is within the world but we cannot use sin for our advantage. The Lord is indeed sovereign over all things- good and evil- and He orders all things for His glory and the good of them that love Him. It is not for us to take that power to ourselves though: the wisdom of man is foolishness, even (often) the wisdom of Christians. The ruinous consequences of the folly of Christians, who thought they could innovate and make use of man's creations for God's glory, are all around us. Therefore when we are talking about the creations of men each must be judged individually whether it be good or bad. And even if it is lawful that does not mean it is expedient.

Dave Mustaine is a Christian too

I remember many persons on this forum arguing Kanye West was a born-again Christian because he released the album Jesus is King and got very hot and bothered that some of us would dare question such a claim. I wonder how many of those persons still think that way...

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." Matthew 7:20

You're getting as quotable as the Puritans!

I think we know what the Puritans' judgment of rock would music would have been.

God designed our bodies to respond in different ways to different kinds of music. I just utilize the music to improve performance.

The fact our bodies react in certain ways to certain stimuli does not make those reactions lawful. We are fallen creatures and we react to sinful stimuli in sinful ways. "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other" Galatians 5:17. Therefore we certainly cannot judge the lawfulness of something by the way our body reacts to it. As has been said above: even lawful pleasures have been corrupted by the Fall.

Is there no slight correlation between both where there is a cognitive reception of words, although I grant obviously it’s easier to ignore lyrics in a song.

The difference between a novel describing the bad actions of a character, and the lyrics in a song, is that the novel allows for those actions to be condemned, either directly or by the consequences of those actions, and for extensive examination of the behaviour of the characters. Songs, generally, do not have the scope to contain multiple narratives and points of view which would allow the bad actions of a character to be so examined. And it is naïve in the extreme to think that songs which describe bad actions are meant as warnings. One need only listen to any random rock or rap song to realise that these songs glory in the immorality and depravity of the lyrics and the lifestyles described thereby. And even when one comes across the rare song which describes bad actions with regret or as a warning, this is often undermined by the music accompanying these songs. The music makes these songs enjoyable to listen to again and again, to learn the lyrics and sing along. And so the warning element is forgotten and the song is listened to purely for its musical and aesthetic qualities, not its moral. At least with a novel there is not the manipulation of music to counter the message the author wishes to convey. (Of course moral teaching in novels can be undermined in other ways, such as giving moral qualities to unlikeable characters and vice versa.)

Furthermore pop, rock, rap songs are not intended to be didactic but are primarily concerned with engaging the emotions; with manipulating emotional and physical responses in the listener. A song is intended to make the listener happy, sad, excited, relaxed, aggressive. This applies to both the music and the lyrics. Literature, on the other hand, is primarily interested in engaging the intellect. It of course does produce emotion in the reader as he digests what he is reading but the emotional response is a rational one whereas with music the emotional response is instinctive, unthinking and even irrational. Often lyrics make no sense but if accompanied with the right music in the right key (making the right sound at the right time) and sung in the right way, can produce a very strong emotional response in the listener that is nothing more than a physiological reaction to stimulus. Therefore even if the lyrics of a song are immoral it can still be aesthetically pleasing to the listener and produce the singer's desired response. And so the listener is inured to the sinfulness of the lyrics and their subject matter and is, instead, taken up with the sensations produced. That is one of the great dangers with music, especially music accompanied by lyrics.

I think it's important to separate the two issues at this point.

(1) The musical style. Paul loves using athletic analogies, and he seems to portray athletic performance in a positive light by the way he makes in an example of our spiritual walks. He does not disparage it as he disparages drunkenness in another analogy. So I think it's fair to take for granted that any musical style that improves athletic performance is good, and the burden of proof is on the one who wants to disparage a particular musical style.

The fact Paul makes use of athletic imagery doesn't mean he is recommending Christians exert a lot of their time and effort in physical athletics. It's an analogy making use of what was very familiar to the people of those places at that time. There is so much vanity and time-wasting in modern "working out" before we even get to the music. And granting that limited, chaste and circumspect "working out" (if there is such a thing) is lawful that doesn't mean that music must be lawful if it "helps" one perform this task. Ends do not justify means.

 

[Santos]

As a former "rocker" and former "worship leader", I can say that I am typically more convicted by most of the songs sung at my church than by any secular music that I would allow to be played on a radio in my truck or home.

 

[alexandermsmith]

As a former "rocker" and former "worship leader", I can say that I am typically more convicted by most of the songs sung at my church than by any secular music that I would allow to be played on a radio in my truck or home.

By convicted do you mean you are more troubled by songs sung in your church than those you hear on the radio?

 

[Polanus1561]

@alexandermsmith what “secular music” do you listen to, if you do? No this is not a gotcha question.

 

[Polanus1561]

@alexandermsmith
My first reply to OP that you quoted is based on the fact that I believe that things like beats are just that—beats, not morally corrupted by the fall. I believe do re mi major keys, musical harmony would have existed in a non-fall world. I believe this is part of divine design for use in the world that has not disappeared postfall. Further, we use that in whatever worship we have in terms of melody no?

Unbelievers find out about creative tools from bronze metal to beats or musical elements through history. We can use them.

I push back against any idea that these things are qualitative tainted by pagan use of it. For example, we surely do not avoid usage of words that people use in a sinful sense. All things that are morally neutral are given by God for creative expression (which can be godly or sinful).

Sure, unbelievers can use all these morally neutral by itself things like beats and words to present something sinful but that’s another matter.

The OP first started talking about beats but this thread has morphed we can all agree.

 

[JH]

@alexandermsmith what “secular music” do you listen to, if you do? No this is not a gotcha question.

(I'm not Alexander) But personally, I don't listen to any music other than the Psalms, minding post #71. I will, however, listen to rain/wind often as background noise when reading works other than the Bible.

 

[RamistThomist]

The music for this (not rock) is likely played in some church every Sunday

"Daughter of Elysium,
intoxicated with fire, we enter,
O Heavenly One, your sacred shrine.
Your magic once again unites
all that Fashion had sternly divided.
All men become brothers
where your gentle wings abide."

I had that memorized in German at one time.

 

[RamistThomist]

I remember many persons on this forum arguing Kanye West was a born-again Christian because he released the album Jesus is King and got very hot and bothered that some of us would dare question such a claim. I wonder how many of those persons still think that way...

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." Matthew 7:20

Then if Dave Mustaine's fruits are good, then we are justified in calling him a Christian, right? Also not sure why you poisoned the well by bringing Kanye into it.

 

[DanSSwing]

Even that idea is complicated. Dissonance, for example, is relative to what we have become accustomed to. With a good ear, you can hear harmonics in an open string that contain notes that some might call dissonant. But the sound is pleasing with those harmonics.

I was also thinking of some attempts at figuring out ancient middle eastern music. Their notions of tonality, harmony, and rhythm seem different to our ears that are accustomed to 12 step scales. If by some time machine we could go back and listen to temple worship in the time of David, our ears might be surprised.

I listen to mostly progressive music and love things like polyrhythm. With some of it, it does take time to appreciate the art.

 

[DanSSwing]

The fact our bodies react in certain ways to certain stimuli does not make those reactions lawful. We are fallen creatures and we react to sinful stimuli in sinful ways. "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other" Galatians 5:17. Therefore we certainly cannot judge the lawfulness of something by the way our body reacts to it. As has been said above: even lawful pleasures have been corrupted by the Fall.

You could use that same argument to argue that we should not eat foods that taste good simply because they stimulate the flesh. I am not arguing that the flesh enjoying something automatically makes it good, but you seem to be making the opposite argument--that our default position should be that if the flesh enjoys something, then that makes it bad.

Often lyrics make no sense but if accompanied with the right music in the right key (making the right sound at the right time) and sung in the right way, can produce a very strong emotional response in the listener that is nothing more than a physiological reaction to stimulus. Therefore even if the lyrics of a song are immoral it can still be aesthetically pleasing to the listener and produce the singer's desired response. And so the listener is inured to the sinfulness of the lyrics and their subject matter and is, instead, taken up with the sensations produced. That is one of the great dangers with music, especially music accompanied by lyrics.

I agree with that, which is I would encourage young people in particular to completely avoid any songs with immoral lyrics. But the older you are, the easier it becomes to enjoy the music while actively disagreeing with the lyrics--all taken on a case by case basis of course.

 

[alexandermsmith]

@alexandermsmith
My first reply to OP that you quoted is based on the fact that I believe that things like beats are just that—beats, not morally corrupted by the fall. I believe do re mi major keys, musical harmony would have existed in a non-fall world. I believe this is part of divine design for use in the world that has not disappeared postfall. Further, we use that in whatever worship we have in terms of melody no?

Unbelievers find out about creative tools from bronze metal to beats or musical elements through history. We can use them.

I push back against any idea that these things are qualitative tainted by pagan use of it. For example, we surely do not avoid usage of words that people use in a sinful sense. All things that are morally neutral are given by God for creative expression (which can be godly or sinful).

Sure, unbelievers can use all these morally neutral by itself things like beats and words to present something sinful but that’s another matter.

The OP first started talking about beats but this thread has morphed we can all agree.

That's fair enough. I didn't engage with the point about "beats" because I think there are more pertinent issues involved. However I would say that there are certain rhythms which are associated with demonic rituals or which are encouraging to lascivious dancing, indeed the point of the music is to facilitate such. So it's not something which can be dismissed.

As to my personal listening habits when I do listen to music it is of the classical (umbrella term) variety.