Posted on 04/16/2009 12:49:06 PM PDT by marbren
As Joshua and Moses returned down the mountain after receiving the Law from God, they heard what at first they thought was the noise of war; but as they hurried closer, they recognized that the people were singing rather than fighting. Nonetheless, their song soon proved to be the sound of war as three thousand men of Israel lost their lives in punishment. The church of today faces a similar situation. With the prevalence of rock music in Christian services, those approaching the average church house will often find themselves wondering if the noise that they hear is that of war against God or music praising God. It is a question well worth pondering; for although we sing to a God who inhabits the praise of His people, we also sing to a God who executeth judgment upon all. Let us determine then in which category God Himself would place rock music. Would He consider it to be the sound of music or the noise of war?
http://www.av1611.org/rock/rock_noise.html
(Excerpt) Read more at av1611.org ...
I'm confident that 100 years from today, "Blessed Assurance" and "Amazing Grace," which have stood the test of time, will still be sung.
Amplification has only been around 50 years or so. Maybe this is also part of the problem!
The article says rock music makes plants less fruitful.
I’ve heard this argument before back in the early 70’s, namely, that rock music is “devil music” because of the syncopation. I was told by a well-meaning and devout Christian that Africans, who used to be pagan and converted to Christianity, heard some Christian rock music and asked why they were using “witch music” in the church. They said this because the rhythms used in tribal witch chants/music was also heard in the Christian rock music. It was the syncopation (the accent of the off-beat) that they were refering to.
The problem with this argument is that sound is sound. A musical pitch or rhythm is not “moral” or “immoral”. There are not “holy” rhythms or “unholy rhythms”. There are not “sacred notes” and “profane notes”.
The same goes for musical styles. This arguing about what is proper sacred music and what is improper has been going on since the 9th century when Pope Gregory mandated that all the “acceptable” Christian melody be put in a book. This book still exists today and is popularly called, “Gregorian Chant”. If you’ve ever played the game “Halo” you’ve heard some Gregorian chant. Pope Gregory said that only the melodies put in this compilation is appropriate musical material for use in the church.
Christian musicans started messing around with the chant melodies, which were initially only monophonic (one vocal line - no harmony), and began to add other parts around the chant melody. They got so adept at creatively hiding the chant melody with all these parts going on around it (sometimes 5, 10, even 20 parts) that the Catholic church had to put a stop to it at the Council of Trent.
Even so, chant music had gotten so complicated that only trained musicians could perform it. Congregational singing nearly died out.
During the Reformation in the 15th century, Martin Luther reintroduced congregational singing by utilizing familiar secualr songs by putting Christian words to the melodies that people already knew. He did this because there were no familiar hymns at the time. As the Reformation progressed, Protestant musicians began composing new music for use in their worship services. Within a few decades these new Protestant hymns became the new “Standards”. These new songs became “proper” hymnody - the new tradition. Nothing else was needed.
Of course new songs were being written and arguments and theological debates raged furiously during the 16th and 17th centuries over what was now the new “proper” Christian sound and lyrics. Anything new was looked at as “too secular” sounding - only what Grandad listened too was “right” Christian music.
My point is this argument has been going on since Christians started singing in their worship services.
My own personal take on it is that as long as the lyrics are theologically correct with sound Christian doctrine, then the songs in whatever style should be acceptable. It may not be a style you like, but styles come and go. Time has a way of weeding out the bad stuff. “A Mighty Fortress is Our God” has stood the test of time for nearly 500 years. I wonder if that will be said of the majority of music written today? I don’t think so. In the meantime, honor God with your heart, your mind, with your obedience, your motives, and with your verbal praise and worship (in whatever style). There are no musical styles specified in the Bible about what is proper - we only have the texts of the Psalms. So, maybe it is the words that are the most important?
Well thought out response, and you may be right. But, what if your first paragraph is true?
The story about African Christians may very well be true. But, does that mean that just because pagans use syncopation in their tribal worship that no one else can use it? That to use syncopation in a song is sinful?
How do we know that syncopation wasn’t used in ancient Israel? We have no idea how their music sounded. The earliest treatises about music and its affect on people come from the Greeks (at least that’s what I’ve read). They point out how certain modes of music affect people emotionally. There’s no doubt about it that people can be manipulated emotionally with music - but, does that mean because that’s possible that we shouldn’t ever use music in worship or that it should never have emotion? No - but we do need to be aware of it.
My biggest problem with any Christian artist today is not so much the style but what are their motives? I hate the “marketing” of Christian music that goes on today. Many Christian artists are treated and promoted just like secular rock stars. But, what I wonder about is what is their personal life like? Are they living a Godly Christian life? Is their ministry all about them or serving Christ? Of course, this should be the concern of all Christians - not just musicians.
Anyway, I’m more concerned about the witness of all Christians in their personal and professional lives than with what style of music they use to praise God with. At least that’s my take on it.
Ping to read later
Unfortunately, a lot of the good stuff is also being weeded out. Our Methodist hymnal contains only a smattering of the works of great Methodist hymn writers such as Charles Gabriel, Ira Sankey, William Kirkpatrick, and Phillip Bliss, and there is not a single hymn by Leila Morris, who wrote such classics as "Sweet Will of God," The Stranger of Galilee," and "The Fight is On, Oh Christian Soldier." However, Internet sites such as the Cyberhymnal are helping to make traditional as well as modern Christian music available and to preserve it for posterity.
Good points.
However, I don’t know that we can say emphatically that rock music emphasizing the same features as withcraft music
is TOTALLY neutral.
I don’t think we have sufficient knowledge to say that. We just don’t KNOW that emphatically.
INDEED.
WHY SHOULLD THE DEVIL HAVE ALL THE GOOD MUSIC/////LARRY NORMAN
Is there any old hymn or well loved Christian music that incorporates off beat?
The Bible talks about cymbals and tambourines, is that equivalent to drums?
Is there anything to the thought I have that we "beat" drums vs strumming guitars and blowing in flutes and trumpets?
When was the first drum set produced?
When was "The Little Drummer Boy" written?
Is it volume, drums or rock off beat that kills plants in the article?
Fiji Hill: Unfortunately, a lot of the good stuff is also being weeded out.
Nevadan: Yes, that is true, too. But, there is always hope as long as it is in print somewhere. Bach’s music was “lost” for about 100 years before Mozart rediscovered it and performed the “St. Matthew Passion”.
Marbren: Is there any old hymn or well loved Christian music that incorporates off beat?
Nevadan: Great question. Yes, there are inumerable examples of Christian hymns and Gospel songs that utilize syncopation (accent of the off-beat). The syncopation may not be the predominant factor, but syncopation is used in every style of music I can think of. In the song, “What A Friend We Have in Jesus”, that first part of that line “What a Friend” is syncopated, the next is “all our sins” is syncopated.
Syncopation is one of the things that creates rhythmic interest - it’s one of those things that moves you to tap your toe to a song.
Other examples where syncopation is more predominant are Spirituals, such as “Somebody’s Knocking at Your Door”, “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot”, “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho”, “Go Tell It On the Mountain”, and on and on.
marbren: The Bible talks about cymbals and tambourines, is that equivalent to drums?
Nevadan: I would say, yes. There are examples of ancient instruments found at archeological sights. I’ve never googled it, but you could probably find sites that have photos of some of these artifacts. Some of the pictures I have seen in books about this subject show instruments that are pretty close to what we would describe as tambourines and drums. I honestly don’t remember if I saw anything resembling a cymbal. Percussion instruments were utilitzed, but we don’t always know in what way. However, you must remember that Bible translators are not always quite sure that these words are equivalent to modern day instruments.
marbren: Is there anything to the thought I have that we “beat” drums vs strumming guitars and blowing in flutes and trumpets?
Nevadan: Percussion instruments are any instrument that is hit with a mallet, strummed, scraped, or shaken in order to make is “sound”. Examples are: drums, xylophones, tambourines, maracas, guitar, banjo, even a piano (the felt hammers inside the piano “strike” the strings and thus the piano is considered a percussion instrument).
Woodwind or brass instruments are all sounded by blowing air into the instrument, so yes, flutes, clarients, trumpets, oboes, french horns, etc. all work by blowing into them.
marbren: When was the first drum set produced?
Nevadan: Wow, If you mean “when was first what we think of as a modern drum set produced”? I just don’t know. You could probably google the history of the drum set and come up with that. My best guess is that the modern version of a drum set developed around the early 1900’s when “ragtime” music and “jazz” music began to be developed. I’ve seen pictures of bands that have a drummer sitting behind a bass drum with a snare drum and a cymbal. Nothing fancy like today, but pretty similar.
marbren: When was “The Little Drummer Boy” written?
Nevadan: I think it was written in the 1950’s by a gentleman named Harry Simone (sp?). That is a lovely song, isn’t it?
marbren: Is it volume, drums or rock off beat that kills plants in the article?
Nevadan: To be honest, I didn’t get that far into the article, but I would venture to guess that it would be the volume that would bother plants. I know that’s what bothers me about morons blasting hip hop in their car stereos - you can hear/feel the bass a block away.
I have read about some studies that say classical music helped plants grow more lush, but I don’t know what volume they played the music at. Sound waves produce a definite phyiscal sensation - the louder it is, the more harmful to the ear - and this is probably true no matter what style of music is played. Just turn the “1812 Overture” up to ten and see what I mean. You could blast out any hip hop/rock music with that (it utilizes cannon blasts at the end).
I would say that the worst thing about rock music is the volume. It doesn’t have to be played at ear-splitting volume, but that seems to be what most performers do.
Wow, Thanks for the excellent information and your time and effort in answering my questions. Maybe we should only focus on amplified volume?
Quix: However, I don’t know that we can say emphatically that rock music emphasizing the same features as withcraft music is TOTALLY neutral.
Nevadan: By the way, I LOVE talking about this stuff and I appreciate the chance to discuss it.
I’m going to tentatively disagree with you about the neutrality of musical sounds. I think musical sounds and styles are neutral - it is the composer’s intent and the lyrics put to the music that makes it “non-neutral” - at least in my opinion.
Pagan music also employs melody - not as predominant as the rhythm, but none the less it is used. Should we not use melody because some pagan ritual music uses it?
Don’t get me wrong - I was raised in a conservative Southern Baptist church - I love the classic hymns of faith and Gospel songs of the past. I think much of the new “Christian” music today is shoddy, boring, and uncreative. I think contemporary Christian music is following the lead of secular musical innovation, rather than, as in times past, leading musical innovation and development. The poetry of the lyrics are sub-par for the most part. Even where Scripture is used, the music often doesn’t seem to fit the meaning of the text.
But, here again, as is so often the case, my opinion is based somewhat also on my own musical taste. And, that, to me, is the problem with making blanket condemnations of a certain style of music - so much of our likes and dislikes regarding music is based on our upbringing and our taste. Someone once said in regard to church music and what was appropriate, “I don’t know much about it, but I know what I like”. I think this is sometimes the basis for people not wanting a certain style of music in the church. Their musical taste is “correct”. I’m not saying that is always the case, but I do think that is part of it.
Another example of Christians taking pagan symbols and giving them new meanings are Christmas symbols - the evergreen wreathe, candles, holly, Christmas trees, etc. An evergree tree is not inherantly “pagan” just because pagans used to use them for their own meanings - right? Of course not. The tree is just a tree, candles are just candles - it is the meaning we put on those things that make them Christian or pagan.
In the same way, I think, musical styles and sounds are morally neutral - it is what we put on top of those sounds - the meaning of the words that make it appropriate or inappropriate for Christian worship.
Just so you know, I was raised in a Baptist church all my life. I studied music in college (B.A. and M.A. in music history and literature) and went to a Baptist seminary and got a masters degree in Church music. I was a full-time minister of music in Baptist churches for about 15 years and part-time music minister for about another 15 years. So, I’ve had to deal with this issue from time to time. For me, and I think I have Scriptural backing on this, I deem music to be inappropriate in worship for one or all the following reasons:
1. The text is secular - no Christian message whatsoever.
2. The text is doctrinally unsound - teaches beliefs that are contrary to Biblical, sound Christian teaching.
3. The volume of the accompaniment is so loud that the message is un-hearable.
4. The singing is such that the words are unintelligible.
5. The performer(s) are knowingly and publicly living lives contrary to Biblical teaching of how a Christian should live (I’m speaking of consistent non-Christian lifestyle - not perfection).
6. The motive or attitude of the performer is such that it seems that they are more concerned about “them” rather than about bringing glory to God. You know - prima donnas.
Beyond these things, I really don’t care about the style as long as it can be performed well. Some people try to sing or play Bach when they really aren’t ready or just don’t have the talent. Some people try to play or sing things in a variety of styles that are beyond their ability or vocal range. If you’ve ever seen the beginning episodes of American Idol you know what I mean.
Anyway, I’ve probably said more than enough. This issue will never go away. As long as there is music in the church there will be disagreements as to what it should be. I guess that’s one of the reasons we have different denominations. Thanks for reading.
guitarplayer1953: WHY SHOULLD THE DEVIL HAVE ALL THE GOOD MUSIC/////LARRY NORMAN
Nevadan: Larry Norman did indeed use that line in one of his songs, but I also found out that the first person to use that line was Martin Luther during the Reformation. He loved the musical innovations that were going on at the time - both in secular and in sacred music. He saw no reason to not use musical innovations and styles that people liked. Why leave that to the Devil was his question? I think it’s a good one.
I think musical sounds and styles are neutral
is this true or are you reflecting on it.
I think you make very worthy points.
Will have to ponder more when I get home and see if I have any further comments, then.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.