Musical Sounds: Moral or Amoral?

I'm still not convinced that music (by itself) can communicate anything. It can influence, yes, but I don't believe it actually COMMUNICATES a message to us. Watching children march around a room to a band tune shows that music can have an influence, but then, so can smell, sight, and other sounds. Put those same children in a dark room and they will get quiet or scared, put them in a sunny place with lots of bright colors and they will become noisy and happy. Walk them past the garbage dumpster and they will wrinkle their little noses in disgust. I don't think anyone here would argue that the influence of other senses, like sight or smell, actually communicate, so why the sense of hearing with music?

 

I believe music communicate an emotion in and of itself. We take the common wedding march and we develop a very good emotion relating to here comes a bride. The actual song to that tune is that of a prostitute in the original arrangement....Yet, the music itself, in our setting, communicates the absolute opposite.

I think words do play a vital role in the music as well.......whilst the sound of the music can also develop an independent feeling.

Cheers,

Jim

 

There are certain kinds of music that will lift you up and others will bring you down. Not one of them have any words. However you will have loads of emotion. It is much the same as seeing colors.

If music by itself had no value then advertisers and movie producers would not put so much time into music.

 

I would say yes if it incites emotions that are not healthy. I could not imagine the Holy Spirit moving a worship leader to play music that would incite emotions that would promote evil. I see in Ps. 150 that there is a message about music there in praising God. It is talking about particular instruments that produce certain sounds.

 

The answer is not quite that simple. If it was all about preaching then there would be no need for personal discipleship.

If it were that simple then James 1:22 would not be necessary. Preaching to hard hearts has little affect. When the preacher is not a doer of the word then his own words condemn him.

James 1:22, "But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves."

 

And that, Pastor Larry, is the entire crux of the argument.

Is any particular gun more sinful than others? Or are all guns sinful? Or are guns sinful at all?

Is any particular musical instrument more sinful than others? Or are all musical instruments sinful? Or are musical instruments sinful at all?

I could give you examples of New Age music, and "death metal"; is the music by itself sinful?

Or is is the way we use the tool that makes it sinful? Whether that tool be a gun, or a hammer, or a trombone, or a harp?

Aren't *we* the ones capable of sin, not the tools we use or creations we make? Isn't the use of the tool, or the creation, a reflection of us and our nature?

 

Last time I checked, this was a free-for-all discussion & debate forum that didn't require "credentialing" before posting on certain subjects.

And the last time I checked, even the most uneducated person can occasionally come up with a gem of knowledge.

In fact, it's been my experience, in my short time on this planet, that we can sometimes educate ourselves right out of intelligence.

 

Actually, I don't see that it says "use certain instruments"...so what "particular instruments that produce certain sounds" are you thinking about?

 

I have never seen black represent life and goodness. Have you? Black would be typical of Satanic worship and darkness though. Certain colors are associated with particular feelings and emotions. I cannot imagine the Holy Spirit leading someone to make conflicting statements using colors.

 

150:3, “Praise Him with trumpet sound; Praise Him with harp and lyre.
150:4, “Praise Him with timbrel and dancing; Praise Him with stringed instruments and pipe.
150:5, “Praise Him with loud cymbals; Praise Him with resounding cymbals.

All of those instruments make distinct sounds.

 

Other countries may have different aspects associated with colors; for example, Afghanistan uses black in their flag to indicate martyrdom/sacrificing one's life for the country. White is used in China, I believe, to represent mourning (whereas we in the United States use black).

As for the instruments: Are you indicating that you believe only those instruments, producing those particular sounds, are the ones that we should be using?

 

No. What I am saying is the sounds produced are ones used in praising God.

 

I wonder what you mean by communicate.

And I also think that for all Don's illegitimate complaints about "credentialism," this shows why people need to know who to listen to. The idea that music doesn't communicate in and of itself contradicts everything that we know about life and communication and music. But most of us have not been taught to think critically about the world God has given to us. It is the "experts" that people hate ... the ones who have actually taken the time to think about things that are able to voice what we all know. Your examples of colors, smells, etc. are further evidences that you get the point, you just don't appear to understand what communication actually is.

Think about it: If you play lively march music, you are communicating to people that they should respond in a certain way. That's why mom's don't play Sousa for naptime. It doesn't communicate to the baby that it is time to relax. And that has nothing to do with words. But it is so instinctive that it usually doesn't even get discussed outside of marginal discussions within Christianity.

Why is it that now, six pages into this discussion, no one is answering my basic questions about the issues? I have asked a number of questions and no one is willing to even offer a point of discussion about them. Strange that you want to discuss the issue but you don't want to actually discuss the issue. (Not your personally ABCGrad).

Why didn't the LA Lakers fill the arena with Pachelbel's Canon in D when the Lakers won the NBA championship?
Why is it that mothers instinctively know what kind of lullabies to sing to their children (not words, but style of music)?
Why is it that people instinctively know when a tone of voice or body language contradicts the words that are spoken?
Why is it that Luke says that a grunt can communicate anger when he has no Bible verse for it? Isn't he contradicting his own stated position?

There were others and these are being ignored.

 

Living organisms communicate, things do not. Our words, actions, and music are just tools. They do not have a will or intellect and cannot be sinful by themselves. Just like letters printed on a chalkboard, musical notes are are just "there." We can arrange them to make a song, add rhythm and intonation, and WE communicate, using them as tools.

Musical notes written on a page are a tool used by the songwriter for communication, but the communication is from the writer who arranged the song to sound happy, sad, etc. A mother singing to her baby is the one communicating, using the music as a tool.

Maybe that's splitting hairs, I don't know. But that's what I mean by communication.

 

Of course, but who are you more likely to believe? Or rather, who should you be more likely to believe? Someone with education, training, and experience or someone without?

Again, it's so obvious that it hardly requires asking, but apparently it does.

The freedom for all to participate in a conversation doesn't mean that all have valid or intelligent opinions. All voices are not equal. That's the point.

Well, sure, but how do we know it is a gem? by having something to compare it with, right? And we get that by education and training.

No, not really. It's possible to be educated wrongly, or to fail to think clearly. It's possible to be unable to communicate clearly. But you can't really educate yourself out of intelligence.

 

Great. I will look forward to it.

I am troubled by many of these things ... in fact, all of them except mixed swimming which I think deserves some real cautions. Our difference is not that you think we should preach the Bible and I think we should not. I think we should preach only what the Bible says. But I think we need to consider something like the Sermon on the Mount as a model for the fact that sometimes there are issues built into statements that are expected to be believed and practiced.

I agree.

Again, I agree.