Bob said "Music is neutral"; Do you agree?

Status
Not open for further replies.

philosophizer

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
I see so much hostility towards this subject, it must mean you guys love your Rock n Roll and to toss it out is too much meat for you to eat.

Nimrod, please don't let this prevent you from continuing in this debate. I really am interested in what your position is... and we were getting so close to it. Can music overpower our will and force us to do things we shouldn't do?
 

lucybelle

TOL Princess
Originally posted by spackle
Is music neutral? No.

All music is good.

ALL? That's a very broad statement- could you please define 'music'? Because some will define music as having mulitple parts- including lyrics, and we can all agree that not all lyrics are 'good'.
 

spackle

New member
I would not include lyrics in the term "music". I would include melody, harmony, rhythm, and tambre in that definition. I would consider lyrics to be poetry. But, I don't beleive that the lyrics to any song are in themselves evil either. I think that they can reflect evil, just like music can, but I don't think that anything creative in nature can be evil. Creativity, language, expression, emotion,...these are all very good things.
 

Sozo

New member
"I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean."
 

Nimrod

Member
Originally posted by Sozo
"I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean."


Is this verse talking about food? Or is pronography clean?
 

Nimrod

Member
Originally posted by philosophizer
You claim that Rock music feeds the flesh and invokes uncontrolled or worldly actions. So you are also claiming that hymns or whatever you deem as "good" music feeds the spirit and naturally invokes a condition of praising God. Am I right?

Yes and No. Most Classical music is good, but just listening to it will not make you worship God or praise God.

Originally posted by philosophizer
Okay, is there any proof that the music of classic hymns causes provocation to praise God?

I don't know.

Originally posted by philosophizer
This might be an interesting study. Instead of studying the effects of Rock music ad nauseum, someone could pluck a person off a remote corner of the globe that has never heard Christian hymns before, subject them to the hymns, and then observe if the person begins to praise God.

Before Benny Hinn gets on the stage there is about 45 minutes of music that is Repetitious. Hypnotizing the audience. Rock n Roll does the same, many repetitions.

CCM stands for "Contempory Christian Music "
 

philosophizer

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
Is this verse talking about food? Or is pronography clean?

Things are clean. But pornography is more than just a thing. Pornography is the content of specific things. A porno magazine is unclean, not because of the paper, the staples, or the ink that comprise the structure of the magazine, but because of the content. Pornography is a concept, not a thing.


Most Classical music is good, but just listening to it will not make you worship God or praise God.

So, if praising God isn't your measurement of what makes music "good" what is? How do you know some classical music is good? Didn't you say that music is good if it "feeds the spirit"?


Before Benny Hinn gets on the stage there is about 45 minutes of music that is Repetitious. Hypnotizing the audience. Rock n Roll does the same, many repetitions.

That is a generalization. Not all Rock music is repetitious. Also, many hymns and classical pieces are repetitious. All genres have this quality. All genres need repetition to some degree.

Modern songs aren't all that different in structure to classical compositions. 20th Century composer Leonard Bernstein gave an interesting presentation once on a TV show he had in the 60's. He compared a Mozart sonata to a Beetles song to show the similarities in the sections and structure.

Can you give any examples from Rock n Roll that demonstrate your hypnotizing effect? I'm talking about specific songs here. Or maybe a specific example of what you might consider good music?
 

spackle

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
Is this verse talking about food? Or is pronography clean?

The human body is good. Photography is good. Publication is good. Sexual desire is good. All of the individual components by themselves are not only "not evil", they're good.

Pornography is evil in that it exploits people, promotes sexual immorality, destroys relationships, and provides an escape from reality where people can feel the thrill of sex without the responsibility or relationship. But all of these things have to do with the fallen nature of humanity. What is unclean is the human motivation and reaction that goes along with pornography, not the individual components by themselves.

All porn really is is a perversion of something that is very good. People are temped by it because they have a basically good desire (intimacy) that is misdirected.
 

Nimrod

Member
Originally posted by spackle
Pornography is evil in that it exploits people, promotes sexual immorality, destroys relationships, and provides an escape from reality where people can feel the thrill of sex without the responsibility or relationship.

It affect the human more ways than what you just described.
Bob's latest MP3 on KGOV "Christian 007", he talks about pornography about 15 minutes into the program, and how destructive it is, beyond what what we humans can tell. Music is moral and it affects us beyond what we understand.

Originally posted by spackle
But all of these things have to do with the fallen nature of humanity. What is unclean is the human motivation and reaction that goes along with pornography, not the individual components by themselves.

What is the human motivation behind creating Rock songs?
(hint: I want to be a star, I want to be famous, I want to be rich)
Even in these Contempory services at Church, I have seen guitar solos on to give praise to the player not God.

What is the human motivation behind creating hymns?
I want to praise God and worship Him.

Really what you are saying is that "all music is neutral, there is no absolute right or wrong on music. A bunch of cans being dragged behind a car, is good music".
 

spackle

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
It affect the human more ways than what you just described.

True. I wasn't trying to give a comprehensive list of the evils of pornography. I was trying to make a comparison between material particulars, which are good, and human fallenness, which is evil.

Originally posted by Nimrod
What is the human motivation behind creating Rock songs?
(hint: I want to be a star, I want to be famous, I want to be rich)

And nobody ever went into classical music for these reasons?
:rolleyes:
Franz Liszt was an extremely accomplished and technical pianst/composer in the 19th century. He was the moral equivalent of a rock star of today, groupies included.
I graduated from a conservatory with a degree in classical piano, and I can tell you, the people playing classical music are NO better than anyone else, morality wise.

Originally posted by Nimrod
Even in these Contempory services at Church, I have seen guitar solos on to give praise to the player not God.

Have you ever seen a vocal soloist giving praise to God? What's the difference? How about a violinist?


Originally posted by Nimrod
Really what you are saying is that "all music is neutral, there is no absolute right or wrong on music. A bunch of cans being dragged behind a car, is good music".

Not at all. I'm saying that creativity, whether in music, art, dance, literature, etc... is a good thing, and has it's origin in God. The devil can NEVER create anything. Then, within the art forms you have a bunch of variables that determine whether it's good art. A bunch of cans being dragged down the street may be horrible for you to listen to, but you may be able to argue that it is good art by virtue of something else. Besides, who says you can't use that sound in a context? I've heard a song where the entire rhythm track was made up of basketballs and tennis shoes bouncing and squeaking on a basketball court. A very creative idea, and it sounds great.
But this is talking about good vs. bad art. The only way morality is involved is the fact that it's good that creativity is happening.

Most of the people I've talked to who think they know a lot about good vs. evil music/art aren't musicians/artists.
 

Nimrod

Member
Originally posted by spackle
Have you ever seen a vocal soloist giving praise to God? What's the difference? How about a violinist?

It makes a difference when the focus is put on the performer and NOT on God. Or the praise goes to the performer and not to God. When we go to service, it is for worshipping God. Amen.



Originally posted by spackle
I'm saying that creativity, whether in music, art, dance, literature, etc... is a good thing, and has it's origin in God. The devil can NEVER create anything. Then, within the art forms you have a bunch of variables that determine whether it's good art. A bunch of cans being dragged down the street may be horrible for you to listen to, but you may be able to argue that it is good art by virtue of something else.

I am not the standard. The standard is God's Holy Word. Does God think that a bunch of cans being dragged by a car, is good music? Remember Bob's radio fruitcake(MP3 on KGOV memorial Day). In summary he said "My opinion makes no difference. Is there an absolute right and wrong?"



Originally posted by spackle
Besides, who says you can't use that sound in a context?
Context of what?
I would in no way use that as music for the LORD.
Eph 5 19 "speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord"

How is dragging cans melody?

Originally posted by spackle
The only way morality is involved is the fact that it's good that creativity is happening.

Most of the people I've talked to who think they know a lot about good vs. evil music/art aren't musicians/artists.

Creativity might be happening, which is good, but the music may be morally wrong.

Well I am a musician. Guitar G&L S-500, Groove Tube amplifier, Fender Reverb unit, G&L Bass, SVT 300 watt amp. Tons of books, software, palyed in a RocknRoll band, and years behind my study.

I am wondering Spakle, have you every studied the verses in the Scriptures that deal with music? (There is over 500 of them.):doh:
 

spackle

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
It makes a difference when the focus is put on the performer and NOT on God. Or the praise goes to the performer and not to God. When we go to service, it is for worshipping God. Amen.

So we're agreed. It has nothing to do with the instrument or music. If the focus is put on the performer and not on God, that is a completely seperate problem.


Originally posted by Nimrod
I am not the standard. The standard is God's Holy Word. Does God think that a bunch of cans being dragged by a car, is good music? Remember Bob's radio fruitcake(MP3 on KGOV memorial Day). In summary he said "My opinion makes no difference. Is there an absolute right and wrong?"

Funny how you state that you are not the standard and then turn around and project your own musical opinion on God. You say that the standard is God's word. Great. Please show me where in scripture it says that any kind of music is morally wrong.

I believe in good vs. bad art, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking right vs. wrong, a morality question. Please try not to confuse the two.



Originally posted by Nimrod
Context of what?
I would in no way use that as music for the LORD.

Then don't. I don't care. You worship the Lord in the style of your choosing. But don't come down on others who are trying to express their love for God in a different musical style.

Originally posted by Nimrod
How is dragging cans melody?

Ah, that's where creativity comes in. ;)
It might not really be condusive to melody, but you may be able to make a rhythm out of it! Please see the Basketball and Tennis Shoes example above.


Originally posted by Nimrod
Well I am a musician. Guitar G&L S-500, Groove Tube amplifier, Fender Reverb unit, G&L Bass, SVT 300 watt amp. Tons of books, software, palyed in a RocknRoll band, and years behind my study.

Well, now I am confused. :confused: How can you be a guitarist with a nice set of gear, have played in a rock band, and be arguing against rock music, while I am a classically trained pianist who is arguing for rock music. (I also play guitar. I'm a strat guy, myself.)
It makes me go, "WHaaa?"

Originally posted by Nimrod
I am wondering Spakle, have you every studied the verses in the Scriptures that deal with music? (There is over 500 of them.):doh:

You mean like the one that says "Praise Him with loud cymbals. Praise Him with clashing cymbals"? (psalm 150 vs. 5) Last time I checked the cymbals weren't very melodic. :think:
 

Sola Scriptora

New member
The statement that many of the hymns came from bar tunes and brothels is a fiction. Anyone who has actually STUDIED this knows that CCM has re-written history in a pitiful attempt to justify their carnal ways. Luther did not use "bar music".

The church has been a musical pioneer, and it was THE WORLD that was borrowing our music and using it in the bars friends. What is rock music, but a perversion of tent revival music and negro spirituals???

All music IS NOT nuetral. The world knows this, the commuist party knowsthis, the US government knows this, the pioneers of rock music admitted this, and most importatnly, the devil knows this. Who refuses to know this??? American Christians of the Laodicean age. Not suprising, but very sad.
 

spackle

New member
Originally posted by Sola Scriptora
The statement that many of the hymns came from bar tunes and brothels is a fiction. Anyone who has actually STUDIED this knows that CCM has re-written history in a pitiful attempt to justify their carnal ways. Luther did not use "bar music".

The church has been a musical pioneer, and it was THE WORLD that was borrowing our music and using it in the bars friends. What is rock music, but a perversion of tent revival music and negro spirituals???
I have a question. Exactly when do the changes in a musical art form become a "perversion"? When we put drums behind them? Beethoven's fifth: Good. Beethovens fifth with drums: BAD!
Negro Spirituals: Good. Negro Spirituals sung by a white guy with a guitar and a band: BAD!
Ohmygosh, the 1812 Overture has CANONS in the rhythm section! That CAN'T be good.
Originally posted by Sola Scriptora
All music IS NOT nuetral. The world knows this, the commuist party knowsthis, the US government knows this, the pioneers of rock music admitted this, and most importatnly, the devil knows this. Who refuses to know this??? American Christians of the Laodicean age. Not suprising, but very sad.
I know this. I never said music was neutral. It's not. It's good. It's very, very good. There's not one instance in the Bible where it says:
"And God saw that they were distorting their shofars and banging their heads to the timbrel and harp. And God was not pleased, for the music must be light and easy, with a good melody. And He said, 'I will create Barry Manilow who will write "Mandy" and lead my people into the paradise of easy listening, where nothing will ever be offensive or demand anything, especially growth or understanding from my people.' And it was good."

Scriptural references to music are positive! Do you think that every tongue, tribe, and nation are all going to be praising God with Lutheran Hymns? Gimme a break!
 

Shaun

New member
ROFL, Barry Manilow.

Never thought I'd see that in a theology forum.

On the topic:

Anyone who says rock music is evil and shouldn't be used in church needs to study their history. The hymns were radical when they were put forth--and have you ever HEARD the old-style instruments they used pre-800 AD? (It's not just an organ, I'll let you know). They're loud, and often out of tune.

I do agree rock can be perverted--I'm currently working on a group in Austin that will (God-willing) become something like David Crowder Band and Sonicflood. I understand how music can be used in hypnotism and leading people away from the Word. That is why I make sure I'm not doing those things.

It's not the music that is evil, it's the application of it. If you're singing, "Jesus is Lord, hallelujah!", it shouldn't matter what type of instrumentation is behind it.

What is the human motivation behind creating Rock songs? (hint: I want to be a star, I want to be famous, I want to be rich) Even in these Contempory services at Church, I have seen guitar solos on to give praise to the player not God.
WHOA, wait a minute, buddy. Problems here:
1) I'm going into the Christian music scene. TRUST ME, it's not about the money. I gave up a lucrative $80k+ / year job to follow Christ, and am now guaranteed just enough to eat 3 meals a day, if I'm lucky.
2) Just because something isn't done to your voice, doesn't mean it's heathen. Remember organs? You know, in traditional services. How about simple pianos? Well, most of the time in those services, THEY SOLO. They are usually the only thing there. Are they giving glory to God? Yes they are! You seem to think that creating a firm frontal melody means you're taking the emphasis off the song.
I have to ask--do you play rythym or lead guitar? A true lead guitarist understands that a "solo" is not so much a solo, but rather a time to emphasize the energy or melodic focus of the song. It's not about the guitarist. Whether I'm hitting mellow Em chords or running up scales high in the fretboard, I'm still giving glory to God.
Let's put it this way. When a writer goes off and talks about his personal life in a book dedicated to teaching people about Christ, no one seems to mind. Why? Because he's trying to show the glory of God in his life. Such is the same with a soloist. They're showing the audience the God-given talents that have been graciously extended to them (just as much as the rythym guitarist under him, and any lead guitarist knows that a weak rythym can ruin a solo). They're showing through the talent they have their form of worship to the Lord.
I know when I'm trying my hardest to make that pentatonic run, it's the time and the effort beforehand that I put into practicing that so that I might be able to show perfection in my musical ability to the Lord.

Besides, hasn't anyone told you yet? Most Christian bands don't play for the crowd. (Note how I said most.) They play for an audience of one. They worship God in the way they know how--if the audience gets involved in their little circle of worship, GREAT. Then they can invite them in, and even let them take a few solos (hello sing-along silences). Either way, the focus is still on the audience of one. The Lord. Glory to Him, not to a band member.

It's the message that counts. Heck, if I judged a pastor by what color tie he wore, (oh no, it's too radical), then I'd start having to wonder why I was in church in the first place.

Don't judge. Just worship, and love God with all your heart. :D

Shaun
you know, that organist is showing off
let's can him too
 
Last edited:

philosophizer

New member
Originally posted by Nimrod
It makes a difference when the focus is put on the performer and NOT on God. Or the praise goes to the performer and not to God. When we go to service, it is for worshipping God. Amen.

So personal excellence is to be avoided at all costs? No. We should always strive to be excellent in our abilities and actions that we can say "praise God for letting me share this ability with you." If someone can play an amazing guitar solo and then praise God for the ability, so much the better.


I am not the standard. The standard is God's Holy Word. Does God think that a bunch of cans being dragged by a car, is good music? Remember Bob's radio fruitcake(MP3 on KGOV memorial Day). In summary he said "My opinion makes no difference. Is there an absolute right and wrong?"

Does God say He doesn't like cans being dragged? If the cans are used in a creative way that draw notice and then the performer/artist directs that notice toward God, then nothing is wrong. But if the performer/artists keeps the notice and attention for him/herself, that is wrong.


Creativity might be happening, which is good, but the music may be morally wrong.

Nope. The direction of the creativity might be good or bad. It might be pure or it might be perverted. This direction is the musician's message. The music is simply the carrier for that message.
 

philosophizer

New member
Nimrod,

Could you name a song or musical selection that you would call "good" and then give your reasons why it is good? This might clarify what the criteria are.
 

Nimrod

Member
Originally posted by Shaun

Anyone who says rock music is evil and shouldn't be used in church needs to study their history. The hymns were radical when they were put forth--and have you ever HEARD the old-style instruments they used pre-800 AD? (It's not just an organ, I'll let you know). They're loud, and often out of tune.

So if they did in the past, then therefore it is good?
Is this your thinking?
Again, your not looking at God's Holy Word for an answer but history of man.

Originally posted by Shaun
I do agree rock can be perverted--I'm currently working on a group in Austin that will (God-willing) become something like David Crowder Band and Sonicflood. I understand how music can be used in hypnotism and leading people away from the Word. That is why I make sure I'm not doing those things.


So, you are admitting your biased towards Rock n Roll.

Originally posted by Shaun
It's not the music that is evil, it's the application of it. If you're singing, "Jesus is Lord, hallelujah!", it shouldn't matter what type of instrumentation is behind it.

So you are saying that any type of music is fine and dandy as long as the lyrics are right. A bunch of cans being dragged bahind a car is fine and acceptable as music to give praise towards God. Now if you disagree that this is music, then the next question is What standard are you using to define music? Your own, or God's?
Again that does not prove that music is amoral.


Originally posted by Shaun
WHOA, wait a minute, buddy. Problems here:
1) I'm going into the Christian music scene. TRUST ME, it's not about the money. I gave up a lucrative $80k+ / year job to follow Christ, and am now guaranteed just enough to eat 3 meals a day, if I'm lucky.

I agree that was a bad arguement on my part.

Originally posted by Shaun
2) Just because something isn't done to your voice, doesn't mean it's heathen. Remember organs? You know, in traditional services. How about simple pianos? Well, most of the time in those services, THEY SOLO. They are usually the only thing there. Are they giving glory to God? Yes they are! You seem to think that creating a firm frontal melody means you're taking the emphasis off the song.

Solo's are fine, I am just saying that when the attention and praise is given to the performer. I see this a lot with "guitar solo's" and "drum solo's". But not with the "violen" and "organ".



Originally posted by Shaun
I have to ask--do you play rythym or lead guitar? A true lead guitarist understands that a "solo" is not so much a solo, but rather a time to emphasize the energy or melodic focus of the song. It's not about the guitarist. Whether I'm hitting mellow Em chords or running up scales high in the fretboard, I'm still giving glory to God.

And showing off your skills.


Originally posted by Shaun
Let's put it this way. When a writer goes off and talks about his personal life in a book dedicated to teaching people about Christ, no one seems to mind. Why? Because he's trying to show the glory of God in his life. Such is the same with a soloist. They're showing the audience the God-given talents that have been graciously extended to them (just as much as the rythym guitarist under him, and any lead guitarist knows that a weak rythym can ruin a solo). They're showing through the talent they have their form of worship to the Lord.

The writer of the book is telling his readers how Christ changed his life. The muscian hasn't changed, he is still using secular music.

Originally posted by Shaun
I know when I'm trying my hardest to make that pentatonic run, it's the time and the effort beforehand that I put into practicing that so that I might be able to show perfection in my musical ability to the Lord.

Paise God.

Originally posted by Shaun
Besides, hasn't anyone told you yet? Most Christian bands don't play for the crowd. (Note how I said most.) They play for an audience of one. They worship God in the way they know how--if the audience gets involved in their little circle of worship, GREAT. Then they can invite them in, and even let them take a few solos (hello sing-along silences). Either way, the focus is still on the audience of one. The Lord. Glory to Him, not to a band member.

Sure they do. These Christian's bands try to draw people in through their music. So they are trying to please the crowd.

Originally posted by Shaun
It's the message that counts.

That's is right, the music gives a message, it is a way of communication.

1 Cor 14:8 For also if a trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself for the battle?

The Scripture here gives an example of how music is communication.


Originally posted by Shaun
Don't judge.

What does Bob Enyart say about that phrase?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top