Any such thing as Satan's music?

It is on this point that I reprove you, as Matthew Henry said - failure to reprove a sinner is to partake in his sin.

but also consider:

11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?

i see this as a commandment to not judge fellow believers concerning minor sins or on debatable issues *, as there is balancing scripture elsewhere to keep this from being an absolute prohibition. what do you think?

* edited to add: especially in public

 

Good Question am ha'aretz, and that is what we must all consider.

We must think of what Christ would do if he was here at this time, where would he spend His time?, personally I don't think he would be found in places like pubs and clubs etc.

Of course he would interact with unbelievers but not socially I would think. What do you think yourself?

God Bless'

Enda

PS Thanks for starting a more edifying discussion.

 

You're too quick for me am ha'artz,

I see the point you're trying to make here but I think you're taking it out of context.

James was not referring to righteous judgement but to slander (a sin of speech). Slander comes from envy. When we speak FALSELY against a fellow believer we speak not only against the person but against the law of God. The slanderer (the word devil means slanderer) sets himself above the law.

I don't think you could accuse me of falsely speaking against another believer. I've only addressed the things they have openly admitted to.

I have to sign off now but if theres anything you want me to clarify I'll try my best tomorrow

Goodnight all

 

Good Question am ha'aretz, and that is what we must all consider.

We must think of what Christ would do if he was here at this time, where would he spend His time?, personally I don't think he would be found in places like pubs and clubs etc.

Of course he would interact with unbelievers but not socially I would think. What do you think yourself?

i think jesus would interact socially. consider:

Matthew Chapter 9

9 And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him.
10 And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

as brother su wei pointed out above, we have to be careful with our weak flesh - obviously a problem our lord would not have. i think an issue of supreme importance is WHY one associates with sinners - is it to wallow with them, or to lead them to salvation? and even if one's motives are good, it is important to have discernment to avoid circumstances that would lead one to sin and ruin one's testimony. i think people are gifted differently in this area and we should prudently err on the side of not getting in over our heads.

my two cents

[ March 01, 2003, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: am ha'aretz ]

 

I see the point you're trying to make here but I think you're taking it out of context.

wouldn't be the first time

James was not referring to righteous judgement but to slander (a sin of speech). Slander comes from envy. When we speak FALSELY against a fellow believer we speak not only against the person but against the law of God. The slanderer (the word devil means slanderer) sets himself above the law.

i can see that.

here is quote from matthew henry's commentary (he seems to combine elements of both our opinions):

I. We are cautioned against the sin of evil-speaking: Speak not evil one of another, brethren, v. 11. The Greek word, katalaleite, signifies speaking any thing that may hurt or injure another; we must not speak evil things of others, though they be true, unless we be called to it, and there be some necessary occasion for it; much less must we report evil things when they are false, or, for aught we know, may be so. Our lips must be guided by the law of kindness, as well as truth and justice. This, which Solomon makes a necessary part of the character of his virtuous woman, that she openeth her mouth with wisdom, and in her tongue is the law of kindness (Prov. 31:26), must needs be a part of the character of every true Christian. Speak not evil one of another, 1. Because you are brethren. The compellation, as used by the apostle here, carries an argument along with it. Since Christians are brethren, they should not defile nor defame one another. It is required of us that we be tender of the good name of our brethren; where we cannot speak well, we had better say nothing than speak evil; we must not take pleasure in making known the faults of others, divulging things that are secret, merely to expose them, nor in making more of their known faults than really they deserve, and, least of all, in making false stories, and spreading things concerning them of which they are altogether innocent. What is this but to raise the hatred and encourage the persecutions of the world, against those who are engaged in the same interests with ourselves, and therefore with whom we ourselves must stand or fall? "Consider, you are brethren.’’ 2. Because this is to judge the law: He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law. The law of Moses says, Thou shalt not go up and down as a tale-bearer among thy people, Lev. 19:16. The law of Christ is, Judge not, that you be not judged, Mt. 7:1 . The sum and substance of both is that men should love one another. A detracting tongue therefore condemns the law of God, and the commandment of Christ, when it is defaming its neighbour. To break God’s commandments is in effect to speak evil of them, and to judge them, as if they were too strict, and laid too great a restraint upon us. The Christians to whom James wrote were apt to speak very hard things of one another, because of their differences about indifferent things (such as the observance of meats and days, as appears from Rom. 14): "Now,’’ says the apostle, "he who censures and condemns his brother for not agreeing with him in those things which the law of God has left indifferent thereby censures and condemns the law, as if it had done ill in leaving them indifferent. He who quarrels with his brother, and condemns him for the sake of any thing not determined in the word of God, does thereby reflect on that word of God, as if it were not a perfect rule. Let us take heed of judging the law, for the law of the Lord is perfect; if men break the law, leave that to judge them; if they do not break it, let us not judge them.’’ This is a heinous evil, because it is to forget our place, that we ought to be doers of the law, and it is to set up ourselves above it, as if we were to be judges of it. He who is guilty of the sin here cautioned against is not a doer of the law, but a judge; he assumes an office and a place that do not belong to him, and he will be sure to suffer for his presumption in the end. Those who are most ready to set up for judges of the law generally fail most in their obedience to it.

I don't think you could accuse me of falsely speaking against another believer.

of course not brother!

I have to sign off now but if theres anything you want me to clarify I'll try my best tomorrow

goodnight, may god bless you.

[ March 01, 2003, 12:12 AM: Message edited by: am ha'aretz ]

 

You certainly find reason after reason not to produce the evidence you are asked for.

Why do you assume I am trying to be condescending? You suggested that repetitive drum beats are evil and I am responding to that claim.

Now I want to know.If the repetitive percussion made my shoes in the dryer is obviously not evil, what makes it any different thatn the repetitive percussion used in pagan rituals which you say IS evil. There's nothing condescending or desparaging at all about my line of inquiry.There's no point in playing the victim, especially when you're the one standing in moral judgement.

Wha?

Double wha? Is this some kind of obscure reference or secret code?

This has nothing to do with healthy debate. You're already in the middle of one.If God convicts my conscience, I'll be the first to let you know.Until then you'll be praying that He uses you to do so right?

 

Well, I think you would already know the answer to these questions. The thing that Satan does is pollute and pervert the things that God has made.

If I spit in your Coke, then suddenly it becomes my Coke.

You should examine the fruits. A good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit, neither can a good tree bring forth evil fruit.

You don't need scientific studies. Science cannot establish the morality of an issue. Just look around you. How does the demeanor of those attending a rock concert--even so-called Gospel rock--compare to those who attend the New York Philharmonic?

 

Actually, it becomes a coke with saliva in it.

Many Christians worship and are edified through CCM.

That's right, all you need is a little common sense.

Hip Hip Hooray! Does this mean no more irrelavent links to scientific studies?

Well isn't that interesting? We don't need the Bible to determine the truth of moral issues. No, all we need is comparative analyisis.

Let's see.The three "so called gospel" concerts that I've attended were different than the New York philharmonic only in as much as everyone stood. Oh yeah, they also sang along and raised their hands in the air. Wait a second, for that matter the bands or singers always gave testimonials about Jesus Christ and preached the Gospel.

WOW! I guess there really is a difference between the New York philharmonic and CCM!

 

Hello Am Ha Aretz (Is your proper name Teresa by the way?)

Thanks for the Matthew Henry quote, there is some very good points in it and things I need to give some thought to.

In the meantime I will also quote a paasage from Matthew Henrys commentary which I think explains where I am coming from.

We must have no fellowship with sin nor sinners, sinful works are works of darkness: they come from the darkness of ignorance, they seek the darkness of concealment, and they lead to the darkness of hell. These works of darkness are unfruitful works; there is nothing got by them in the long run, whatever profit is pretended by sin, it will by no means balance the loss; for it issues in the utter ruin and destruction of the impenitent sinner. We must therefore have no fellowship with these unfruitful works; as we must not practise them ourselves, so we must not countenance others in the practice of them. There are many ways of our being accessary to the sins of others, by commendation, counsel, consent, or concealment. And, if we share with others in their sin, we must expect to share with them in their plagues. Nay, if we thus have fellowship with them, we shall be in the utmost danger of acting as they do ere long. But, rather than have fellowship with them, we must reprove them, implying that if we do not reprove the sins of others we have fellowship with them. We must prudently and in our places witness against the sins of others, and endeavour to convince them of their sinfulness

The passage of Scripture you quoted is a fine example of what this is saying. Note how our Lord reproved the sin of the Pharisees, He didn't let it pass by without comment.

If we are to imitate this, and I think Matthew Henry is saying that we are, this would mean that we shouldn't spend time with people who are engaging in sin unless we are prepared to point out that sin to them. If we go into pubs for example it doesn't matter (in one sense) if we are getting drunk ourselves if we are in the company of others who are, we must reprove them for it.(If we don't then we are in danger of falling into the same sins as them) If we live according to this principle then what pleasure would we have in the pub, I don't think there are many who would welcome us into their pubs anyway.

The same rule applies to my communication with the three gentlemen on this board who are promoting the notion that to spend time in Pubs, to consume alcohol and to listen to rock music are not sinful acts. I accept their liberty of conscience in the matter but I feel I must act according to my own conscience. Therefore I reproved them for what I consider to be sinful.
You know, I am a weak and impressionable Christian and I think there are others like me. The temptation is always there to say 'if its alright for them, then its alright for me' it would be so easy to fall into my old ways. I think there is a danger that if other christians (in this case Su Wei and myself) don't speak out against these things then people who are struggling with these sins could be drawn back into them.

I have been at fault(as I have already acknowledged) in the manner of my reproofs, definately in my early postings and this is something I am looking at and trying to put right.

At the same time I find it interesting that the three individuals in question have not responded to me in any way since I have 'cleaned up my act'.

I hope this clears up my thinking on this, I'm sure I've said things that you wouldn't agree with but as I say I am acting according to my own conscience and endeavouring to serve the Lord as best I can.

Your brother in Christ'

Enda

 

Hi, and please indulge a grandma's own personal opinion, I raised three of my children in the 60's..no problem with the music we heard or allowed them to hear,,,, I do remember taking them to hear Stryper at the church located right around the corner from where we live now.....I just considered it contemporary Christian music,and at that time,didn't see anything "wrong" with it,the fellows did speak about Jesus,etc....and later my boys didn't really comment too much about what they'd heard,etc.and as they "matured" I presumed their interests changed in the type of music they preferred......I was a child of the "50's",and enjoyed the music then ( you could actually understand the words,and humm along to the song or melody) and by the way, they are called "classics" now......you know what songs I mean, you who are in your 50 to 60's........so all I have to say is, it's what the meaning of the song is and what it's saying to whoever hears it.....does it tell about Jesus? Does it encourage committment and a higher quality of life in Him? Those would be the criteria in which I would 'judge" a song today.....and give me some of the good old-fashioned gospel songs anyday, they never go "out of style".....and that's all I have to say about that....." say goodnight Gracie"
smileyfish says Hello from oHIo

 

Travelsong. You should change your name to Babblesong.

I've never used scientific evidence to discern the morality of an issue. Ever. I've only used it when challenged to provide it or to counter the pixilated whims folks like yourself assume to be factual.

Speaking of which, you said Many Christians worship and are edified through CCM.

Not at all. Christians are only built up through God's Word. God's Word does not lose it's efficacy simply because it is wrapped in a sensual package. It will not return to Him void. It accomplishes His purpose despite the CCM, not because of it.

But when God's Word is wrapped in rock music, we are actually sending mixed messages, as an article by that name in the 1996 Summer issue of Communication Reports reports. The article described a study done by a doctoral candidate on sexual imagery used in rock, country and Christian music videos. The study found that sexual imagery is used in relatively equal amounts ... and more frequently than can be attributed to chance.

It would appear that those who say that CCM puts no difference between Christians and the world might have a valid point.

Well isn't that interesting? We don't need the Bible to determine the truth of moral issues. No, all we need is comparative analyisis.

Now, tell me how on God's green earth you squeezed that out of my admonition to rufus to obey Christ's commands to examine the fruits?

Let's see.The three "so called gospel" concerts that I've attended ...

Which being interpreted means, "I'm too lazy to get off my excess fat and really study an issue before I spout off about it."

...were different than the New York philharmonic only in as much as everyone stood.

What, no moshing?

Rocking God's House

 

I love this analogy....

I was thinking about it. My little kids will drink my drink even if i wanted to be selfish and spat into it to keep it mine...

That's coz little children have no discernment about how disgusting spit can be and maybe they're used to drinking spit.

Geddit?

Anyways, that's about as far as the analogy goes....

 

That's right, all you need is a little common sense.
[/QUOTE]
i will oblige Travelsong if indeed this is be helpful in finding some answers for Rufus.

Leesee... if you travelled to all the continents of the world, and you observed people engaged in demonic, anti-god worship and you noticed that consistently, there was a use of drums (percussion instruments) and drumming (repetitive rhythmns) to induce trance, altered states of consciousness, common sense will tell you that there is something inherent in the quality of this kind of "music" that makes people go into altered states of consiousness, and used (harnessed) by the pagans for this desired effect.

Travelsong, you have admitted that music does have a physical effect. How then does one think that by "christianising" a pagan thing (which is used in devil worship to induce altered states of consciousness) by putting christian words to it, (and i can picture Satan rubbing his hands in glee) how can one believe that anything godly can come out of it???

Comon sense???!?!

Where is your "new song"? have you made known your salvation? Is it recognisablily different from the heathen?
Psalms 98:1-2 <<A Psalm.>> O sing unto the LORD a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory. The LORD hath made known his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly shewed in the sight of the heathen.


No, objects like drums, metronomes, (yes, even dryers) are not evil just like individual letters of the alphabet are not evil. But it's when you arrange the letters that they become words that have moral value or not.

It's when you arrange the beat and put in accents and stresses that can become used of Satan in his own hell-bent worship.

You will find lots of rhythmn in worldly musical styles, most obvious of all is rap. whether or not is has Christian lyrics, it still achieves the devil's purposes.
(by the way, there is no such thing as some forms of music that's acceptable for public worship and some others just for private. It's all the same because God is Omnipresent.)

Classic hymns have rhythm. But it is kept nicely in the background, behind the melody and the harmony.

 

And you should change yours to Boreon but that's neither here nor there.

Oh, you didn't post THIS link to suggest that music is always either good or evil because the research reported on this site concluded that music is communication?

You link to irrelavent stuff like this on a regular basis to support your moral claims.Do I need to submit more proof or shall we drop it on the condition that you do everyone a favor and stop linking to it all together?

Christians are built up by pursuing holiness and nothing else.There are many ways Christians are edified: fellowship, worship, Bible study, the works God has called us to accomplish, the list goes on.

CCM if done in a true spirit of worship is no more or less "sensual" than hymns sung a cappela.

I find it a terrible thing that so much of CCM immitates the world in both vacuous content and slick marketing.The fact is this has nothing to do with music or worship and everything to do with money.There is still plenty of Christian music out there that doesn't fall into that category.And you know it.And you intentionally focus on the bad stuff just so you can issue blanket moral condemnation on all CCM.Shame on you.

It would also appear that those who judge the lives of others without even knowing the first thing about them are no different than the Pharisees.It's interesting that for all of your moral proclamations, when it comes right down to it, you are forced to admit that your judgements against your fellow brothers and sisters in Christ are based on nothing more than your own pereived appearances of them.I see irony in that.Do you?

You didn't point rufus to the Bible to demonstrate whether or not there is any such thing as "satan's music".All you did was tell him to make a comparative analysis between a Rock/Gospel concert and the New York Philharmonic.

No, it means that I am able to use the gift of common sense in order to complete your request and compare the conduct of the two venues that you mentioned.After all it was your implication that by performing this evaluation one would be able to judge their fruits.

On a side note mr. moderator I'd just like to bring it to the attention of everyone who watched you run away from our little debate while playing the victim that I was never so childish as to resort to personal insults.How telling it is that you do.Are you perchance listening to angry music?

What a revalation.I had no idea that there are bad examples in Christian music.

By your logic I could post a link that shows people practicing faith healing, slaying in the spirit, and teaching the prosperity doctrine to prove that Pentacostals aren't Christians.Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if you've already done that.

 

btw, glad to meet you, Aaron. according to Travelsong, I'm supposed to get along "famously" with you!

 

There are only two relavent observations about pagan rituals and the use of drums and percussion from your statement.

1)People are naturally superstitious.

2)Percussion lends itself to the practice of many superstitious pagan rituals.

How do you leap from these observations to the conclusion that repetitive percussion is evil?

Is a metronome evil if I use it to keep time while playing the piano?

I believe I have said that if music does have universal effects on the listener they would be purely physiological.Certainly not moral. Music has no more power to cause me to sin than pagans have the ability to invoke the power of spirits through the use of percussion instruments.

First of all, God created sound and the laws that govern it.Not man.Drum beats and musical styles don't become pagan just because pagans use them.By that logic we could never do anything because the world has already used it for evil.

Yes, I'm going to give you a dose.Let's look at Aaron's analogy which you are so fond of.

Aaron said:"If I spit in your Coke, then suddenly it becomes my Coke".

Aaron's analogy is in response to the initial question that rufus poses which is:
Is there any such thing as Satan's music?

In this analogy we are meant to picture the coke as those things that God has created good.Spitting in the coke is meant to represent Satan's desire to twist and pervert those very same things.Finally, we are meant to conclude that when Satan perverts the good things that God has created, they become his.

I think this is a pretty good analogy actually. The only problem with it is that like most everything you guys say, it operates on the presupposition of an unestablished axiom.In other words you expect everyone to take for granted your conclusion that God has ordained certain styles of music as good, and condemned others as bad.There certainly is no indication of this anywhere in Scripture.

With respect to sex (created good), God has ordained it to be practiced only within the bond of marriage.We find this as almost the first lesson that the Bible teaches.A basic study of the Bible shows that Satan has indeed perverted this gift which God has given us, and describes in full detail, nearly all the ways man can accomplish defiling himself and blaspheming God through a sinful practice of sex.

We could discuss a laundry list of things which God created good and Satan perverted, all of which will be found in explicit detail in the Bible.

But not music.No, music is not spoken of anywhere in moral terms in the Bible.Have you ever stopped to think about that?Doesn't it make sense to you that the reason for this fact is that music by itself cannot cause you to either commit an act of sin or righteousness?Or that music by itself is incapable of communicating sinful or righteous thoughts and feelings?

My new song is in my heart, and it is expressed wherever I am.But then you wouldn't know that because you don't know me.It's unfortuante to see you dipsense judgement without reservation.

Thank you for admitting as much.Words do indeed communicate meaning.Words can express hate and love, idolatry and true worship.Our speech is a direct reflection of our hearts, and this is why the Bible has much to say about the way we communicate.

Please, by all means demonstrate the truth of this statement. THAT IS ALL I ASK.Please show that music can communicate sinful thoughts or feelings.How many times do I have to ask you to prove this before you even make an attempt?

What makes a rap rhythm worldly? Please demonstrate the truth of this statement.

How does it achieve the devils purposes? Please demonstrate the truth of this statement.

I used to attend a church where they had a morning service with a praise band that played in a more contemporary style, and a late morning service with a traditional worship service.When I spoke of appropriate styles of music for worship I was referring to individual taste.God will find any worship with a pure heart acceptable.

Hahahahaha, and? Are you saying that if pronounced percussion was added to classical hymns they would suddenly become sinful?If so, please demonstrate how.

 

Travelsong said: Oh, you didn't post THIS link to suggest that music is always either good or evil because the research reported on this site concluded that music is communication?

I posted it to support my statements that music is communication and that the feelings elicited by music are real and not imagined.

That's why I posted that. That isn't making a moral judgment. That is a description of an aspect of its nature.

I noticed you abstained from linking to its use in the context of the thread.

On a side note mr. moderator I'd just like to bring it to the attention of everyone who watched you run away from our little debate while playing the victim that I was never so childish as to resort to personal insults.How telling it is that you do.Are you perchance listening to angry music?

I didn't run away. You simply refused to consider the evidence. What was your statement? Ah, yes. Here it is:

Well, what use was there to continue?

And "play the victim?" Puh-leeeze! The only casualty in any dialogue with you is reason itself.

But if you'll recall, my address in this thread was to rufus. It was you that jumped all over me with rude and mocking innuendos.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not threatened in the least by that. I rather enjoy it when I get to get a few jabs in myself.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen, as my famous homeboy once said.

 

I enjoyed your posts immensely, Su Wei.

 

Oh, No! Not David Clown again.