- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (10/27)
- Next Post »DVD Review - The John Bunyan Story
Can We Rock the Gospel?
- 10/27/06
- 87
The thesis of this book is made abundantly clear on the cover. A young man, jamming on an (unplugged) electric guitar, towers over a Bible which lies face-down, trampled and forgotten underfoot. Can We Rock the Gospel? According to the John Blanchard and Dan Lucarini, no, we cannot. “The authors make no secret of the fact that we count ourselves among those who are offended by rock music in God’s service and are truly perplexed that so many other Christians go to such great lengths to defend their use of it in both worship and evangelism. We are also concerned at the way in which some leaders, from their positions of power within the church, have forced it upon the rest of us.” So the authors adopt the position that rock music is always and objectively wrong. Period. While the emphasis of the book is clearly that rock music is wrong for worship and evangelism, they make it clear that it is wrong at any time and in any situation. This is hardly a unique position but one that, in my view, would depend on clearly an unequivocally defining exactly what constitutes rock music. Unfortunately, the authors do not do this. They make a brief attempt in the third chapter, presenting the following three principles as being true of rock music:
- Constant repetition. This repetition is dangerous because of the potential hypnotic effect of repetitive music. “Any medium of presentation that induces any loss of self-control or awareness and makes the listener unusually susceptible to whatever suggestions are made by the lyrics is clearly dangerous, and will almost certainly encourage a response that will be largely psychological instead of that which God requires, which is that we should worship him ‘in spirit and truth.’”
- A driving beat. “The backbeat dominates in most rock music songs, hard, soft or otherwise.” These beats can become hypnotic and lead people to become almost drunk on music. “The element of relentless beat and repetition in rock music increases the danger of a shallow, emotional, unthinking response, made at the wrong level and for the wrong reasons.”
- Volume. “We need not waste time proving that volume is an important element in rock music.” The emphasis on volume makes rock music unsuitable for worship or evangelism where the emphasis must be on the words of the songs. “Any method or medium … which makes the Word of God more difficult ot hear, and therefore to be understood, is not serving the cause of God but actually hindering it.”
Strangely, this is as much of a definition as the authors provide. They do point to a wide variety of forms of music they would associate with the moniker “rock music,” and these range from folk and pop all the way to death metal and gangster rap. They quote lyrics and describe artists who barely brush the keys of pianos alongside those who tear relentlessly at distorted and amplified electric guitars. They discuss the Hymns category of Christian music “where you can find Jars of Clay rocking out on ‘It is Well With My Soul.’” So clearly even this song, which I believe has only acoustic guitar, bass and subtle drums, is categorized as rock music (you can hear a short sample of the song here). Essentially, it seems that, in the authors’ minds, all popular music must be categorized as rock. If rock can be acoustic guitar, drums and bass, even played quietly and well “under” the lyrics, it seems that almost everything is rock.
So here are the premises of this book: all popular music is rock and all rock is bad. If Jars of Clay’s rendition of “It is Well With My Soul” is rock, and thus wrong, so must be most of the songs we sing on Sunday mornings. The music of Sovereign Grace must be wrong. The modern renditions of hymns produced by Indelible Grace must be wrong. And so on.
The authors build this case by pointing time and again to secular rock artists, and usually the absolute worst of this music, and then apply the negative conclusions to all rock music, a term they define, as we have seen, far too loosely to be helpful. While some of their arguments are sound, others are almost embarrassing. Rock music (like “It is Well With My Soul”), it seems, makes people move, and this movement mimics sexual movements, thus encouraging people to act out the movements with illicit sex. As with many similar books, this one commonly leans upon strange European death metal bands no one has ever heard of and bands from the seventies that no one listens to anymore. While this may not change the facts, it does make the case seem somehow less than well-researched (especially when compared to a presentation such as Hells Bells 2 which focuses more on bands that are popular today). It is easy to quote George Harrison from the sixties saying that rock music appeals only to the youth, but this was 40 years ago. The youth of the sixties are no longer young, and many generations now embrace popular music. It is no longer foreign music to the majority of believers. And so on. Time would fail me to address all of the arguments presented.
Now the book is not all bad. The authors make some important points. They point out, rightly, I believe, that there is really no such thing as Christian rock. There are Christian words, but no Christian music. There is good music and bad music, music that reflects the glory of God and music that does not. But there is no music that is truly Christian. They emphasize as well that the emphasis of preaching, teaching and evangelism must be on the clear presentation of the gospel. Pastors and evangelists must ensure that music does not interfere with this. They show as well that the rock and roll lifestyle is one largely opposed to God and one that can be difficult to reconcile with a commitment to Christ. They follow on the heels of Steve Camp in pointing out some of the hypocrisies in the Christian music industry, not the least of which is tours emphasizing worship sponsored by secular companies. All of these are good and worthwhile emphases. Yet it seems to me that they simply cannot defend their case.
One statement I found particular telling came in the authors’ discussion of rock’s “red flags.” They discuss worship and write “worship is characterized by reverence, modesty and humility, and has nothing that even remotely aims at our pleasure and entertainment.” I would disagree emphatically with an aspect of this statement! I believe that worship should be pleasurable to both ourselves and to God. It may not be entertaining, but surely it should be pleasurable! They even go so far as to suggest that some music is simply too good for church, as music that is truly brilliant will distract people by its quality. As much as they claim to love music, it almost seems that the authors are intimidated by it and are unnaturally suspicious of it. They want to find clear guidance in Scripture as to the styles of music and disregard any kind of personal or cultural preference. I don’t think Scripture offers us that level of guidance in this situation.
Near the beginning of the book the authors state “rock music is dividing the church.” They present a handful of letters from concerned readers to back this claim. It is true that the church has recently battled through “the worship wars,” but it seems to me this is now a decade or two behind us. Of course there will always be disagreement about styles of worship. There will always be some who prefer one style of music over another and there is nothing wrong with this. But I think this book comes too late. Even many conservative churches have already made the move to worship led by guitar. It seems that, according to the authors, this must qualify as rock music. These churches will not revert to organ or a capella anytime soon. I appreciate the concerns of these authors, but most pastors and leaders have already worked through these issues and are comfortable with the choices they have made. I can’t help but feel the more important issue today focuses more on the lyrics of the songs we sing and the hearts of those who sing them. We can focus on the assembly of instruments at the front of the room, but I think it must be more important to worry about what we sing and how we sing it.
The authors of Can We Rock the Gospel? assemble a case depending on cliches and build it upon a loose definition of rock music. After they have torn down this house of cards, they make no alternate suggestions. How are we then to worship? What musical options are left? They are long on diagnosing the condition, but short on proposing any kind of alternative. As much as I had hoped I would enjoy this book, I simply found it a mess. I was disappointed.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (87)
I thought some of these arguments (i.e. talking about the “backbeat”) died with the Swaggart scandals in the ’80s.
Indelible Grace Music founder Kevin Twit has a helpful article about musical style here and one on criteria for judging rock music here.
“I thought some of these arguments (i.e. talking about the “backbeat”) died with the Swaggart scandals in the ’80s.”
I had thought so too. As I said in the review, I think this book comes to late to really impact the “worship wars.” I believe that the majority of churches accept that guitar, bass and drums, even if only played carefully and “lightly” are no more or less godly or moral than organ or acapella. This is not to say that the book is useless, but the major premises of the book will be rejected by most believers.
As a contemporary worship leader, I have to tip my hand right away, but many of the legitimate arguments I have heard on this issue also apply to “traditional” music- a tendancy towards performance being one of them. There will be a temptation to perform for other people instead of for God regardless of what style one is playing. As for the issue of volume, my church’s organ is way louder than our praise band.
It is important to be constantly evaluating motives and the impression we give when leading worship, no matter what the style, so that God is glorified and we do not try to grab any of His Glory for ourselves.
And lastly, I think it is up to those in opposition of “Christian Rock” to make a clear biblical argument against it in favor of “traditional music”. I haven’t heard one yet.
“I think it is up to those in opposition of “Christian Rock” to make a clear biblical argument against it in favor of “traditional music”. I haven’t heard one yet.”
I think you’re right. I think the issue can be approached purely objectively, but is better approached when an alternative is presented. It’s one thing to say that “rock” music and its variants are evil, but without presenting some kind of alternative, this falls flat. I would have liked to see an argument that went like this:
-Rock music is bad and here is why-Therefore we cannot use it for worship-Traditional music is not bad and here is why-Therefore we must use it for worship
That would have been far more satisfying.
Anyways, back to reading about all the Hebrew variants on the word “discernment.”
On your point of worship being pleasurable, Jonathan Edwards agrees. The highest end of our affections is to glorify and enjoy God. Worship, and the music used in our worship, should as much as possible affect us.Edwards writes in his Religious Affections, “If it be so that true religion lies much in the affections, hence we may infer that such means are to be desired as have much of a tendency to move the affections. Such books, and such a way of preaching the word, and administering ordinances, and such a way of worshipping God in prayer, and singing praises, is much to be desired, as have a tendency to affect the hearts of those who attend these means… But, undoubtedly, if the things of religion in the means used are treated according to their nature and exhibited truly, so as tends to convey just apprehensions and a right judgment of them, the more they have a tendency to move the affections the better (50-51).”
Wow! This takes me back (with a bit of nostalgia, I must admit!) to my first few years as a believer when this issue was hot and the “conservative” shots were fired by the likes of the silly Bob Larson. Yikes!
But personal biases are strong. I find it interesting that you have this review on the same page as you tell of Voice’s new cd. I simply can’t stand rap and so I tend to think of it as an inappropriate medium for worship and the gospel. I know I’m wrong about that. God bless Voice and his ministry. But I can’t help myself. I cannot worship using rap. It doesn’t speak “Gospel” to me. I guess that’s where Mr. Blanchard and Mr. Lucarini are coming from with Rock.
Good post, Tim. Thanks.
R.
This music “thing” is one of those that will never get completely worked out in the church. Nobody is ever going to come to agreement.
That said…I absolutely love praise & worship music, upbeat as it may. I spent 25 years of my life singing hymns-only and never felt the passion of worship like I do now in my more modern worship church.
But…it isn’t for everyone. That is why I’m thankful there are so many churches with different styles out there.
My comment to folks who do not like the more modern music is usually this: Do you really think the disciples and the early church were singing southern gospel or The Old Rugged Cross? Do you think they only sang hymns? Most of the hymns our church calls the foundation of music are much, much YOUNGER than the early church ever was. I’m no expert, but I imagine the early music in the church was much like the Judaic style.
Dr. Paul Jones, organist and choirmaster of Tenth Presbyterian church has a book that took the time to answer the question of what role music plays in worship. His new book is Singing and Making Music: Issues in Church Music Today and it really is a gift to the church. His clear voice is a much better guide to this issue than Lucarini’s book.
I think that God focuses on the heart of the worshiper, not the style of worship. I agree with Joemama in that you can sin in worship singing hymns and you can sin singing contemporary songs; it all depends on where your heart is. I personally find a lot of joy in singing both traditional and contemporary worship songs, and both speak to my heart in different but often equally profound ways. Thanks for a thought-provoking blog; one way or another, it’s something to think about.
While not a big fan of “rock” Christian music (I think I’m getting old), this “it’s all wrong” stuff is so reminiscent of Bill Gothard and his *ugh* teachings. I’ll take Jars of Clay and Indelible Grace (and Newsboys, or Casting Crowns) over what Mr. Blanchard and Mr. Lucarini are listening to, any day!
TomDoctrine Matters
I forgot to add -
If I may, I’ve previously posted some resources for theologically rich worship. I hope it helps and is useful.
Blessings!
TomDoctrine Matters
Tim,You give ample evidence in this review that this is an unbalanced, not-Biblically-focused presentation, such that I won’t take the time to read this book. It has been recommended. However, I wish the positive claims and warnings you allude to were to find a wider audience, ideally in a Biblically sound presentation that rockers and traditionally trained musicians alike could embrace.
However, I can’t agree with you that the worship wars are over. Perhaps we’re far past the bleeding edge — I’ll grant you that. Yet we still hear from pastors regularly through our various fellowships and the Shepherd’s Conference who are having heart-rending problems with style shifts in general and rock in particular. And there is no shortage of seasoned saints who lived through the invention of rock and still find it worldly and/or crude. Furthermore, for the minority in Evangelicalism who are classically trained or schooled musicians in some manner, there will always be a cultural tension due to the intensely myopic and relatively simplistic musical culture of the contemporary church. I don’t mean to unfairly stereotype the situation, but the typical contemporary church sings little or nothing that was written before 1980 to the detriment of a rich repertiore of the best of the songs and hymnody from the preceeding centuries. Plus the music itself is generally limited to a range of hip style which Donald Hustad notes has, “over a period of 30 years, become increasingly primitive… dominated by individuals who determine our culture by reaction” (Jubilate II, 281). Worse, evangelicalism has wholeheartedly embraced celebrityism and a modernistic “the newest thing is always better than the older” attitude with our music preferences. Until the church stops caving into only what is easy and popular, our worship will not reach its potential in speaking the profound truth of God’s Word in rich psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, and will continue to produce oceans of music that is popular now, passe tomorrow, and puny in substance. Like candy. It’s fun to eat, you usually want more, but it doesn’t edify the body like spinach does. But people probably eat more candy than spinach. (Or broccoli. Or insert your least-favorite green veggie here.)
So, for this book to have been a success, it should have examined rock’s weaknesses in light of its ability to sustain the truths of God’s word in song, calling into question whether anyone is actually seeking an artistic standard of excellence any higher than personal taste. After all, what makes worship music a tool for worship is the truth that accompanies it, and what makes it a success is if it truly edifies.
Oh, by the way, we hear about “backbeat” or other anti-rhythmic arguments from time to time too. Apparently in certain corners of Fundamentalism, they’re still alive and well.
Thanks, Tim, for your review!
They even go so far as to suggest that some music is simply too good for church, as music that is truly brilliant will distract people by its quality. As much as they claim to love music, it almost seems that the authors are intimidated by it and are unnaturally suspicious of it.
Does it prove that I am strange if I read this and I immediately think of Ulrich Zwingli?
In any case, if I was going to complain about the typical singing in church, this would not be my focal point. I think it might be correct to say that some of the more-Rock-type music has substantially less content. That may be a valid criticism. However, I don’t necessarily think a thumping beat constitutes something that is unchristian.
Now, I’m not particularly fond of most rock music. However, I think it is important to point out that this is a personal opinion. To elevate it beyond this is simply to go beyond what Scripture allows.
In Christ alone,mike
As I’ve thought about this some more it came to mind that wisdom has little to do with passion and vice-versa. How many churches have split when there is plenty of wisdom but passion rules the day! Relativism springs from a passionate heart even if wisdom would rule otherwise.
!! Hmmmm…..
Didn’t I just write that comment on an article about “Wisdom”?
I think our individual points of view on the subject of Rock Music in church falls under the category of passion and not wisdom.
Some forms of contemporary music, wrongly labeled Christian, are like the foreign women Solomon loved. They eventually turn our hearts so that they are not wholly true to the Lord. When a Christian demands his “rights” to take off his shirt and punk out for an audience and call it worship then certainly we would have to disagree.
The message of a song is in the lyrics and if the instruments distract and distort the lyrics then it should be unacceptable. If the musicians, themselves, distract and distort the lyrics by their actions and antics then it should be unacceptable.
For what it’s worth, that’s my 2 cents.
Thanks for the review.
I remember going to a Dana Key concert at Chapelgate Pres. and he played a song, and sang a secular type country song about drinking and so on.He then asked who thought this was music that offended God. A lot of people rasied their hands.
Then he used the same folk/country music, and he sang words that honored God.
He said a musical note is a note, and a cord is a cord. It’s the words that matter.
Of course melody does matter as well, but not to the extent of what some try to make it; melodies from the devil, or such like.
It seems to me that music, like many other “moral’ issues that have tied the curch in knots, is a matter of perspective, or rather association. There was a time when playing card was considered to be evil based solely on association, same with all alchohol consumption. They were guilty because they were tied to immoral places where immorality happens.
Because of this perception it took decades for these things to be “sanctified” in the minds of many believers (and they may never be in minds of others). Music is essentially the same i think. In the minds of many Rock, Rap, Hip Hop, heavy metal, etc. are all associated with sinful things, therefore they are unredeemable for the sake of worship. I still can’t think of heavy metal or rap as worshipful music, but that’s only because of the associations I have surrounding those genres.
It almost comes down to a “to each his own” perspective. If someone can worship the Lord in all holiness by laying down a phat beat or riffing on a guitar than God bless them. To those who worship the Lord by resounding organ music and 4 part choir harmonies, God bless them.
I’ll go on record as still listening to 70s music. I’ll take Clapton over Christian pop most any day. I do like Keaggy and Michael W Smith, and a few others, who stand on their own as musicians. It seems to me that much of Christian pop is mimicking secular pop and changing “baby” to “Jesus.”
Is it heretical to suggest that listening to Hendrix can glorify God in that it re-affirms common grace? The man had an incredible gift. The fact that he failed to honor the Giver does not change that fact.
As mentioned above, we are called to worship God “in spirit and in truth.” It seems to me that if we take the passion and pleasure out of worship, we are focusing on “truth” at the expense of “spirit.” If, on the other hand, we only sing songs that are popular and fun without regard to their content, we are focusing on “spirit” and neglecting “truth.”
I believe this is a challenge to all of us, particularly those of us who plan and lead worship, to make sure the songs we sing contain both elements. On the other hand, I don’t think every song has to be a perfect balance of these. Some songs may be very spirit-filled, but theologically fairly simple (basically, just saying “I love You, God”). Others may be less emotional, but more “theologically packed”. Many hymns fall into this category, as do some contemporary worship songs (probably in a lower percentage). I think we need a good mix.
It is true that the church has recently battled through “the worship wars,” but it seems to me this is now a decade or two behind us. Of course there will always be disagreement about styles of worship. There will always be some who prefer one style of music over another and there is nothing wrong with this. But I think this book comes too late…
That is like saying…”well, homosexuality is now legal and same-sex marriages official, so let’s not speak against it any more”. After all, that war is “behind” us. That is exactly how the proponents of sodomy and other abhorent lifestyles would have us believe. They are afraid of scrutiny and examination.
However, when it comes to matters of worship and christian conduct, we should always be willing to examine our methods, practices, and traditions. Nothing is above the Word of God, and yet I find here a rather defensive answer to a probing question.
The Church is not to simply adopt the latest fads and fashions, but must bring everything under the microscope and test of scripture. Rather than having to defend against something, we should prove from scripture that what we do is honouring to God.
“Whatsoever you, whether in word or in dee, do all to the glory of God.”
These kinds of books are read by people who simply want to justify their own biases. They don’t care that it’s not researched well or that its evidence is flimsy, they just want someone to tell them what they want to believe. They’ll read the book to reinforce their own dislike of the style.
It would appear that they’ve decided that ‘rock’ music is wrong and then gone out looking for ‘evidence’ to support their stand. Any argument will do. I remember many years ago that a guy preached on the evils of rock in the church I was attending. His basic argument was that rock music used drums - drums are used to ‘keep time’ - time is an earthly concept, ie: God lives outside of time - therefore rock is wrong. I guess we’d better destroy our evil calendars and clocks too.
I’m sure that their definition of rock is purposely vague. It gives them opportunity to apply it to any kind of music that they don’t personally enjoy.
We do need to be aware that not everything is helpful in life and that there is music that would fit into that category but to write the kind of book you’ve described is just sloppy work.
I’m excited that people still have the guts to fight rock music, one of the worldly evils of our time. The reason that the church has worked through it, is because they compromised with the world, just like a lot of churches have worked through ordaining women, and have women preachers.
A note and a chord are neutral in themselves, just like a letter of the alphabet, but once put together, they are communication and can be as pornographic as a novel. The Bible clearly states that communication can be bad, evil or corrupt, and music (w/o lyrics) is communication.
It’s sad that Christians accept worldly music, just like they accept worldly TV shows.
I’m not sure why you don’t like his definition Tim, since ‘driving beat’ certainly covers things well. Classical music may have an occasional drum beat, but it doesn’t drive the music. When a beat is driving the music, then it is driving you, since our flesh responds directly to the beat.
Either the spirit is in control or the beat is.
I find this discussion very interesting as the first 20 years of my life where filled with Bill Gothard like convictions against any form of contemporary music.
Today, myself and my parents (who had originally taught me my original music ‘convictions) have found much joy in embracing contemporary christian music.
I still have many discussions with friends who strongly adhere to a view of seeing CCM as sensual, rebellious, and worldly.
This is a disturbing issue. I believe that those who are so passionately against the use of contemporary music need to be reminded of the authority of scripture, and that the holy spirit was not mistaken in not including therein rigid rules and guidelines regarding music, such as whether the heavy beat falls on 2 and 4, or 1 and 3 in a measure. Let us not try to be more Godly than God by seeking to apply universal music standards where scripture does not speak.
“They discuss worship and write “worship is characterized by reverence, modesty and humility, and has nothing that even remotely aims at our pleasure and entertainment.” I would disagree emphatically with an aspect of this statement! I believe that worship should be pleasurable to both ourselves and to God. It may not be entertaining, but surely it should be pleasurable! ”
I find it interesting that the word translated “worship” in Philippians 3:3 is used in connection in other places with fasting and praying day and night. Entertaining? No and certainly not pleasurable in the normal sense that we use this word. In fact, I don’t think this aspect of worship is ever even used in connection with music in the NT, although I doubt it would be excluded. Worship, at least in this sense of the word, is not focused on what we feel but on outward service to God, no matter how menial, mundane, or even difficult.
By the way, have you ever noticed that Job worshiped when he got the news of the four servants. I know worship can and is sometimes pleasurable but our pleasure is not essential to it.
Good post. I preached on worship last week and just enjoy sharing what I learn.
I wonder what people would say if we marched down the street naked and worshipping God? I am sure that would be influenced by Rock music somehow.
What is going to be the next thing in the “worship wars,” reading poetry written to God by the naked guy marching down the road?
Lance,
With all due respect, would you please define “worldly” as pertains specifically to music style with a definition that applies God’s word to all cultures and ages? The answer is that this cannot be done because it requires going beyond scripture, which is precisely what the legalists have done in spiritualizing the no-drums philosophy. What one person perceives as worldly is not going to be the same as another. That’s why Paul wrote Romans 14.
We use drums and the music that I lead on Sunday nights has a beat. I am in control of the beat and (I pray) the Spirit is in control of me. Your assertion that either the beat or the Spirit is in control is false both in reality and in logic.
One of my greater concerns from the worship wars is that all music is art, and all art is not equal in value regardless of “style.” But those who are able are admonished in scriptures like Ps. 33:3 and 47:7 to be skillful in their music-making. I pray that the contemporary church’s discernment improves in the area of skillful music-making. (I don’t mean finesse — we generally have plenty of polish. I mean in substance.)
Bill,
Good to see you here! This is Brenda M. from CBC. I’m so glad to see you chime in (no pun intended) on this topic.
Lord bless you in your ministry.
I hate to break it to the authors of the book, but Organ music tends to be extremely loud - and can drown-out the congregation if they’re not singing with their hearts. Your review of the DVD about Charles Wesley several months back encouraged be to buy a copy. And one point made in the play/presentation by ‘Wesley’ was that to worship God in song you have to be putting all of yourself into singing. We are worshipping the God who made the universe, and who saved us from eternal destruction! If we aren’t worshipping with our full selves (‘heart, soul, mind, and strength’), we are robbing God of glory due Him.
May I also point out that all music written for hymns was, at one time, contemporary! And have they read the psalms recently? Harps, drums, cymbals, lyres… sounds like God expected some pretty enjoyable (and raucus) worship to me.
Whether someone can intelligently worship God while singing to ‘rock’ music I don’t believe is even the right question to ask. The right question would be are we setting known tunes (which have an associated set of lyrics) to lyrics for which they were not designed? For example, I would have a very hard time singing It Is Well With My Soul to any tune by Eminem. Not because I necessarily dislike rap and hip-hop (I actually like some of it), but because the tunes have lyrics associated with them that are decidedly non-‘Christian’.
This book also seems to ignore the issue that what we consider ‘appropriate’ music for worship is totally unsingable in other cultures. In China, India, the Mideast, African tribes, etc they use a different scale than do we in our western cultures. The tune most known to be associated with Amazing Grace can’t be played on instruments from New Guinea - they’re built to a different base harmonic than we understand.
I don’t believe any form of music is inherently evil. I do believe that certain forms of music are culturally associated with good and bad things, and that should play a role in determining what tunes and styles should be selected for worship in a given cultural context - but it doesn’t mean that a style inappropriate for some churches is inappropriate for all of them.
For example, I would expect to hear more hip-hop- and rap-like music in a church dominated by young black Americans who have grown-up with that musical style all through their formative years. I would think it pretty unusual for a dominantly urban church to be using dulcimers or banjos or bagpipes in their services - they’re not instruments (or accompanying styles) that fit the culture with which the population is accustomed. That being said, I would probably expect dulcimers or folksy music to appear in churches in the Appalachia-rural regions of the US because it is a style associated with that culture.
I’m always suspicious of authors, however well-intentioned, who make it their mission to attack something that in and of itself is not wrong. Music was provided by God for us to enjoy and to use to glorify Him. And like all of God’s gifts, we can use it either to glorify Him, or to use for our own selfish ends.
Warren,
Some music in and of itself IS WRONG. Just like all forms of art. Nude paintings violate God’s commands to modesty. Pornographic novels, magazines and films violate his standards of sexual purity. Art communicates.
We just have to study, and pray for the discernment to know which types/styles/methods are wrong and which aren’t.
This is a good post. I really think it boils down to legalism. When are we going to worry about what matters? Whatever draws us to the Cross and leads us to the feet of Jesus should be our focus. I think that it is important and thought provoking (and fun!) to discuss issues that come up in our Christian walk. Could we see Jesus in heaven pleased with us on Sunday’s while we “rock” to praise music with our hands lifted high and our faces to the floor? Yes. Does Jesus look down on the 65 year old man in the church pugh singing “it is well with my soul” with pure joy as he belts out from his belly the hymn over and over again? Yes. It’s all a matter of personal preference.
We should not despise our gifts.
As the great Scottish missionary, Eric Liddell, said, “God made me fast, and when I run I feel His pleasure.”
I play drums. I’m good. God clearly gave me a gift to play. I hear rhythm constantly. I even feel it in the beat that separates cars when I’m trying to merge onto a busy highway.
Yet I’ve encountered more than my share of venom spewed my way by mean-faced, joyless “Christians” who want to embrace any musician who wants to play music for the Lord, EXCEPT a drummer.
This whole argument—on both sides—is puerile. A person who chooses to give back to God by using the very gift God gave him or her is the one in His will. End of story. How that plays out musically doesn’t matter all that much as long as one’s heart is right with God and is in line with the Holy Spirit.
Time changes much of this. We do mellow in our old age. The 20-yr old speed metal guy will some day be 50, and I highly doubt his musical expression will be the same at that later age, especially if he’s a Christian.
We think far too narrowly and in the moment. God doesn’t work that way, though. He knows the entirety of one’s life. No one is perfect right now. No one will be perfect this side of heaven. Let’s learn to bear with each other a bit more and leave the judgmentalism to people who haven’t grown up yet.
It seems that with music there is a line somewhere that must not be crossed. Surely no Christian could sing Amazing Grace to the noise of Metallica , Beck , Green Day, Rob Zombie, “gangsta rap” or any other music that seems to be a rebellion against beauty and order :anti-music. I have never heard a good irrefutable argument for where that line might be. I think maybe it could be any time that the music fails to only accent the words and starts to dominate the song where it begins to hinder your ability to concentrate on worshiping God with the words of the song. I would sure like to have a good Biblical definition of where this line might be. Perhaps a good chapter for your book might be “Discerning Music in Worship”. It would be a difficult one to write but one that I believe in spite of all that was said in the “Worship Wars” still needs an answer I really get tired of people dismissing the subject with ” It really is just a matter of preference” or the other extreme “You’re going to get hypnotized!” There is a line somewhere. Who knows ,maybe the next generation will play Amazing Grace with their armpits - that could be ………..interesting ;-)
AHHHH!! Run away!!! RUN AWAY!!
Sorry… having Bill Gothard flashbacks. (and no I was never one of “them” Gothardites.)
(breathing in paper bag ~~ calming down)
Seriously though. I love music. I love a great variety of music from the “secular” music of the 1800’s to modern Christian hymns, from psalms to blue grass to some pretty hard rock. I don’t pretend that all of it is worship music and I certainly don’t think anything and everything is befitting for a worship service but some music I listen to because it is just musically superior no matter what kind of heathen wrote it. They still have gifts of common grace and talent. For people to not recognize it for what it is and call it “evil” or “dangerous” (especially if we are just talking about the sound) just makes some Christians appear to be fundamentalist weirdos who obviously wouldn’t recognize good music if a 40 ton iPod fell out of the sky and landed on their heads.
I think I will definitely agree with you that, thankfully, this book will largely fall on deaf ears in the Christian community. (probably because most of us have enjoyed too much ROCK!)
Nan
p.s. How much you wanna bet that they would classify their own book as a “Christian book” and have it sold in a “Christian bookstore” even though last time I checked books and bookstores can’t become Christians! :^D
“Either the spirit is in control or the beat is.”
ROFL!! **wiping tears from eyes…**
When making statements like that you are speaking for yourself alone.
Check the psalms Mr. Roberts. Many of them are extremely rhythmic and written specifically for worship. I daresay they even had what we might today call a “beat.” Some of them were even **gasp** repetative (far more repetative than my personal taste as a matter of fact.)
Nan
And some of them **double gasp** command us to use percussive instruments in the worship of God.
To me, one of the biggest falacies of the argument of this book is that the authors admit that there is no music that is truly Christian, but have decided somehow that there is music that is evil.
Isn’t that essentially saying that evil is more powerful than good?
Some music in and of itself IS WRONG. Just like all forms of art. Nude paintings violate God’s commands to modesty. Pornographic novels, magazines and films violate his standards of sexual purity. Art communicates.
Lance,
This is where your analogy fails: music is analogous to the *medium* of art, not to the content. IOW, you really ought to compare music to acrylic paints, or to empty books.
A painter can either honor God or malign Him with the paints, brushes, and canvas. There’s no moral content in a tube of cadmium red. (Trust me, I’ve looked. :-D ) Likewise, a book is just bound paper — what’s *communicated* on those pages makes all the difference. We don’t dare condemn the Bible because it’s printed using the same process as that used to produce a porno mag. That would be insane.
I propose that it’s the same thing with radio, TV, film, and music. Media are tools, and whether they are used for good or ill depends on the user of the tool. That’s where music lyrics — the message — come into play. Messages *can* be good or evil, because they don’t come out of nowhere. They flow out of the heart of the messenger.
Robert,
When you say that “I know worship can and is sometimes pleasurable but our pleasure is not essential to it,” you come dangerously close to suggesting that God does not desire us to take pleasure in worshiping Him. Is that REALLY what you mean?
I also think you miss the boat, my brother, when you assert that because “worship” in Phil. 3:3 is tied to prayer and fasting, it is therefore not ‘pleasurable’. The reason, Paul says, that he engages in this kind of prayer and fasting, is because
“…whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For His sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in Him…” (Phil. 3:7-9ff, emphasis added)
In other words, fasting and prayer ARE pleasurable to Paul, because through them he receives Grace to know Christ more.
Further, my brother, I encourage you to take a closer look at the implications of statements like, “Worship, at least in this sense of the word, is not focused on what we feel but on outward service to God, no matter how menial, mundane, or even difficult.” What you’ve said here, in effect, is that worship for the Christian is a duty that we have to pay, rather than an overflowing of our joy in knowing God. Do you really think that God is honored when we consider worshipping Him something that we’re bound or obligated to do, rather than something that naturally flows forth from our pleasure in Him? Because that actually sounds closer to the Pharisaical notion of worship: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.”
Christians worship, but genuine, God-honoring worship proceeds from a Christian rejoicing in the pleasure of knowing God and yearning to exalt Him because He is worthy of our exaltation and praise.
A great discussion on a complex issue. While we’re at it, let’s be clear that worship is a response to God, and music is an expression of it. Throughout the history of the institutionalized church, its music has reflected the contemporary culture. My concern with the pop/rock music we perform in churches is that it’s a mono-culture—one slice of Western culture.
I love to rock out, but that’s not usually how I express my heart to God.
This monoculture is not inherently evil, but it has three drawbacks, in my opinion.
It’s exclusive economically—forcing churches to consume huge financial resources. It’s exclusive within the body—allowing only persons with those particular skill sets to serve in music ministry. It’s exclusive in the corporate worship experience because the performers drown out the effect of voices joined together and the congregants sometimes can’t even hear their own voices. And those who might prefer other types of music are excluded as well.
Rock music evil? No. Pop music evil? No. But there’s more to music than that and more to worship than that.
Great discussion to glean from. Once again Tim’s ministry of book reviewing helps the hearts of the Lord’s children to grow in His grace and knowledge.
“And the children of Israel that were present at Jerusalem kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days with great gladness: and the Levites and the priests praised the LORD day by day singing with loud instruments unto the LORD.” 2 Chron. 30:21
This should be the Church even more so when we gather, for we are celebrating the Bread of life, and He is here in His temple, the body of Christ.
“Whatever draws us to the Cross and leads us to the feet of Jesus should be our focus.”
Interesting quote…so whatever works, do it, is that right? Sounds like pragmatism to me. Why is no one asking, “What does God say about how we should worship?” Should we not be concerned about the Regulative Principle of Worship, or are we too modern for that? Also, someone asked, “Do you think the disciples were singing ‘The Old Rugged Cross’?” No, we know what they sang…they sang the Psalms. Now some might say, “Well, there are contemporary worship services that sing the Psalms today.” True…but they only seem to sing the portion that talks about God’s love…ignoring His wrath and the “hard” parts of the Psalms. If you want to read a good boook on worship, pick up D.G. Hart’s book, “Recovering Mother Kirk.” It will rock your world.
Rock is NOT a kind of music!! Rock is an attitude! sheesh!
Dave, to your response: “so whatever works, do it, is that right” does not mean the same thing as I said above: “Whatever draws us to the Cross and leads us to the feet of Jesus should be our focus.” There are many obvious things that won’t bring us to Jesus. My point was that when we worry about silly things like the beat of music and trick or treating we lose all focus on the importance and that is drawing near to the Lord.
Again…my question is, “Why in this debate do we very seldom ask the question, ‘What does God say about how we should worship?’” Would drama in worship bring us closer to Jesus? Many would say, “Yes.” But that hardly gives us the license to have drama in worship, particularly if we hold to the Regulative Principle of Worship (advocated by Calvin, the Puritans, and others) that says, “We may only do in worship what God commands in His Word.” Now please don’t think I’m arguing for only the singing of old hymns…many of those are revivalistic, sentimental garbage.
Great post. Very helpful.
If I remember correctly, some old hymns were written by taking a popular song, usually one sung in the pubs that was catchy, and putting Christian lyrics to them. “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” by Martin Luther is an example. Does this malign the words being sung in the song? Absolutely not. It’s not the music, it’s the words being sung! I wonder if this would make the authors think that this hymn is evil? :-)
Tim, thanks for the thoughtful review.”…We count ourselves among those who are offended by rock music in God’s service and are truly perplexed that so many other Christians go to such great lengths to defend their use of it…” - The Authors
There are two interesting things in that.The word “offended” is certainly used in a way foreign to it’s Biblical usage. The phrase “go to such great lengths to defend” is very interesting. I would think that this book will do nothing to decrease the lengths to which they must go.
“And lastly, I think it is up to those in opposition of “Christian Rock” to make a clear biblical argument against it in favor of “traditional music”. I haven’t heard one yet.” - JoeMamaJoeMama, I would differ slightly. I believe that each person must make their argument for themselves and follow it. We need to get away from the idea of pushing “right” arguments on each other.
Janelle, I had learned that same thing at the Desiring God conference this past September.
Apologies in advance for my oversimplification and lack of anything encouraging but this book sounds retarded.
I lived through the anti-rock crusades of the 70s, such as Bob Larson’s “Rock and Roll: The Devil’s Diversion.” Hard to believe there are still new books taking the same tired approach three decades later: there are rock bands who have evil messages, therefore all rock is evil. The lack of logic from otherwise intelligent men is truly pathetic.
Janelle…
That whole idea that Luther’s songs and others were well-known “bar tunes” has been proven to be a myth by men like Paul Jones (music minister in the PCA) and other scholars. I think that we should stop using that argument.
“JoeMama, I would differ slightly. I believe that each person must make their argument for themselves and follow it. We need to get away from the idea of pushing “right” arguments on each other.” This is just another example of the spirit of the age. “Whatever you like is fine…and whatever I like is fine.” I like rock music…but while I’m driving down the road listening to my iPod…not while I’m trying to worship a God who is holy, holy, holy.
Here’s some info from Justin Taylor’s blog on Luther and supposed “bar tunes”…he is quoting Gene Veith in “World Magazine”:
“For the record, Luther did not take ‘bar tunes’ and put biblical words to them. That legend comes from a comical misunderstanding. Someone apparently heard a music historian referring to Luther’s use of the ‘bar form,’ which refers to a stanza structure, not to what drunks sing in a tavern. Luther did borrow and adapt tunes from earlier hymns, medieval chants, and contemporary composers, but a good number of his melodies were his own original compositions.”
Is this the same John Blanchard that wrote “Ultimate Questions”? If so, I am shocked!
Yes, the thing about Luther and bar tunes is, in fact, a myth. Thanks for pointing that out. When we use myths to back up our arguments we shoot ourselves in the foot.