• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Has God Ordained a certain style for Musical worship?

This debate about "tavern music" seems somewhat strange to me. By "taverns" in the 16th-19th Centuries we should not necessarily assume seedy dives full of out-of-control drunks and women of ill repute. I am struck that John's links are all about "drinking songs" (whatever that means). Who said anything about rowdy drunkards and their "drinking songs"? Taverns were for hundreds of years the seat of town social life in many regards. Practically no one was a teetotaler, but, regardless, it was where everyone would gather to socialize and catch up on the day's news. Often, one copy of a newspaper or pamphlet (often Theological pamphlets) would be brought and everyone would read it, have it read to them, or have it posted.
Important socio-political issues of the day were discussed and debated. Food was served to hungry folk etc. Business was discussed. The U.S. Marine Corps was founded in a Tavern.

The notion that "tavern music" (or at least the common tunes) were adopted for hymnody should bother no one. Unlike the wealthy who could hire musicians, the average person rarely heard music they didn't play themselves. Taverns were one of the places where normal people heard music, at least instrumental music. That common musical styles or tunes were adopted and used for hymns is only natural. What else were they going to use? Madrigals? What music is it expected for normal people to relate to or sing? It was the music they were familiar with. The only reason I can imagine someone would resist this notion is that they are modern personal teetotalers and simply loathe the concept that there was ever a correlation. No one is, to my knowledge arguing that all hymns were adapted from commonly heard "tavern music". But, if, in your hymnal, you see "American folk tune" for music etc...It was likely played in and sung in taverns. So what?

To be certain, there was always a difference between secular and sacred music. But, prior to our modern hymns, average people often didn't sing sacred music. Professional musicians, paid choir members, monks, and nuns sang it. If you wanted normal people to sing hymns, why wouldn't you adapt the music they were familiar with to your sacred message? I would do the same.

I may have said "tavern song" (although I did clarify I meant type of music and folk songs).

Have you ever heard the song "What Child is This?"? If so, did you know that the music is from a late 1500's folk songs called "Greensleeves"? Did you know that in England Greensleeves was a popular folk song often sung in taverns?

That is just one example.

By saying "tavern music" I do not mean "drinking music" but the music found in taverns. Taverns certainly included drinking but they were also social hubs. In other words, I mean popular songs at the time that were easily sung in a group setting, not "100 bottles of beer on the wall".
'Zactly.

Anyone who takes the position that God approves of the use of all musical instruments and all kinds of instrumental music in corporate worship has the burden of proof of showing where the Scripture teaches us that is true.
No, they don't. Precisely the opposite is the case. One would need to demonstrate that specific instruments or styles are verbotten and where. My guess is you are aware that you cannot do so and therefore wish to draw or adapt an arbitrary line somewhere and then shift the burden of proof.

Truth be told, neither side could prove or demonstrate that particular instruments or styles are either permitted or forbidden. The Bible simply does not spell out either case in any detail.

But the Bible does not teach anywhere that only certain types of music and certain types of instruments are acceptable either.

The Bible does not teach anywhere that a paino is an acceptable instrument for worship, therefore it is unacceptable and ungodly.

The Bible does not teach anywhere that a focus on harmony in music (a Wrstern trait) is acceptable to God, therefore it is ungodly.

The Bible does not teach anywhere that we should have a choir, a music leader, a pulpit, a sanctuary, a baptism pool, etc. Therefore these are occult and unacceptable to God (by your logic).

Basically you are elevating your opinion to the level of God. If Scripture does not mention it then your opinion determines what God accepts.


I am asking why you belueve that rock music (without lyrics) is occult. There has to be a readon (other than the Bible does not mention paints, drums, guitars, electric keyboards, air conditioning, pews, etc).
Bob Larson said so....
Also Jimmy Swaggart. :Sneaky
 
Last edited:

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I am struck that John's links are all about "drinking songs" (whatever that means).
Actually, I haven't linked to a single "drinking song."

Maybe I can put the whole "Greensleeves" thing to rest. It's actually in a minor key, so that means it has no influence on hymns, since they are virtually never in a minor key. Well, there is "What Child Is This?" but it's done to the tune of Greensleeves, right? (I play both songs in the key of E minor.)

Concerning the origin of rock, it was a brand new genre when it developed in the 1950's (but more in the 1960's). No one had ever played music with its characteristics until then: always in 4/4, emphasis on the 2nd & 4th beats instead of the 1st & 3rd (syncopation), strong electric bass, always loud, complete mandatory drum set with a hard and driving beat. This pattern built up a physical tension that was not released by the music (think about it).

The lyrics were very often about illicit romance ("I Think We're Alone Now", "Stairway to Heaven," etc.), and the very name "rock and roll" was taken from physical immorality. Many Christians initially opposed it, but when CCM made it "Christian," it somehow became okay. (And the earliest CCM was all rock.) The rock style of CCM still has that tendency to build up the physical tension without release, which is why churches that use it often get real excited during the music.

Concerning syncopation, here is what a music dictionary says about it: "An abnormal metric pattern produced by an emphasis on the normally weak beats, e.g., the second or fourth in 4/4 time or the second or third in 3/4 time" (The Harvard Brief Dictionary of Music, by Willi Apel and Ralph Daniel, p. 293). Syncopation can be used properly and often is in some music genres. The point is that rock uses it exclusively, and that is how the stress builds up in the body from a rock song. This is why in a rock concert, the fans are jumping up and down, etc. The tension must be released somehow.

Jon has been comparing hymn origins to folk songs, and I don't mind that. I actually said it first, if you'll look back on the thread. But folk music was already a long established genre, and did not have the musical drawbacks that rock has. I play (guitar) and sing a folk song or two to my students every time I give a final exam, and they love it! It gets them relaxed and ready to take the test. Imagine if I played a rock song to my students before the test. They'd be all hyper, and not able to settle down, relax and, take the test.

Your links are arguing about "bar songs" and "drinking songs".
That's not what you wrote. You misrepresented me.

Which of our favorite hymns are rewritten “bar” songs?​

Are many of our favorite and most-enduring hymns set to tunes borrowed from “drinking” songs, “bar” melodies, or tavern music?
No.


Did the Wesleys Really Use Drinking Song Tunes for their Hymns?
Wow, do you yell much? I'm not inclined to answer posts like this.
 
Actually, I haven't linked to a single "drinking song."
Your links are arguing about "bar songs" and "drinking songs".

Which of our favorite hymns are rewritten “bar” songs?​

Are many of our favorite and most-enduring hymns set to tunes borrowed from “drinking” songs, “bar” melodies, or tavern music?
No.


Did the Wesleys Really Use Drinking Song Tunes for their Hymns?

That's not what you wrote. You misrepresented me.

Wow, do you yell much? I'm not inclined to answer posts like this.
I literally simply copy/pasted the links you provided John.
The first is the title of the link you posted, ergo, it was in bold and a larger font. (next time I'll control for that if it bothers you). I figured you would know that since you linked to it.

The second is the first sentence of that copy/pasted link

The third link is a hyper-link you posted.

I cannot have possibly "misrepresented" anything. It was all literally copy/paste. I am still figuring out the quote features of this forum.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I literally simply copy/pasted the links you provided John.
The first is the title of the link you posted, ergo, it was in bold and a larger font. (next time I'll control for that if it bothers you). I figured you would know that since you linked to it.

The second is the first sentence of that copy/pasted link

The third link is a hyper-link you posted.

I cannot have possibly "misrepresented" anything. It was all literally copy/paste. I am still figuring out the quote features of this forum.
Using the quote feature will certainly help.

Where I felt you misrepresented me was saying that I linked to "tavern songs." But looking back, your post points out that I linked to articles about "tavern songs," but you do not appear to have said I linked directly to a "tavern song." I'm not even sure that genre exists, to be honest. The song I did link to, "K K K Katy," was a pop song from the beginning of the 20th century that my mother used to sing, not a tavern song. I was just having fun with that, not being serious.

Bur seriously, I'm not sure what your objection was to my links. What was wrong with linking to sites debunking the "tavern songs" myth?
 
Using the quote feature will certainly help.

Where you misrepresented me was saying that I linked to "tavern songs." True, I linked to articles about "tavern songs," but not to any "tavern song." I'm not even sure that genre exists, to be honest. The song I linked to, "K K K Katy," was a pop song from the beginning of the 20th century that my mother used to sing, not a tavern song. I was just having fun with that, not being serious.
I'm sorry about the confusion, perhaps I was unclear but, I did not claim you linked to "tavern songs" I claimed you linked to articles about "drinking songs" in your post #72. Here's what I said:
"I am struck that John's links are all about "drinking songs" (whatever that means)."

My point was simply that, as JonC was suggesting, "tavern songs" is being used in a distinct way to say every-day music of common people.
It does not mean that it is music reserved for drunks or restricted to ill-reputed seedy dives. What I was pointing out is that this gives a distinctively different impression than to say "drinking songs" or "bar songs". Your linked articles and the texts therein repeatedly kept treating them as synonymous.

I do not know what a "drinking song" even is. (even if drunks in a happy state do often enjoy bursting out into song).
I do think it meaningful to refer to "tavern music" in reference to some periods between 16-19th century Western culture, inasmuch as taverns were a common hub of community life and social interaction attended by many people in the community to include politicians, businessmen, clergy etc. It gives a mistaken impression to suggest they are the same.

Put more simply:
I think there is a distinct difference between the terms "tavern" song and "bar" or "drinking" song.
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
My position is not strange at all. It was the predominantly held position among God's people 40-50 years ago until the false teaching that music without words is inherently amoral, neutral, or good was propagated as part of the justification for bringing in the abomination of rock music into the Church.

The Bible does not anywhere teach that any and all kinds of music without words are all acceptable to God. It also does not teach that God does not care about what kinds of instrumental music are used to worship Him as long as the words that are sung are "Christian."
God looks at the intent and the lyrics as one can have a church hymn at a pace and beat to fall asleep by, or else speeded up to clap by
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Concerning the origin of rock, it was a brand new genre when it developed in the 1950's (but more in the 1960's). No one had ever played music with its characteristics until then: always in 4/4, emphasis on the 2nd & 4th beats instead of the 1st & 3rd (syncopation), strong electric bass, always loud, complete mandatory drum set with a hard and driving beat. This pattern built up a physical tension that was not released by the music (think about it).

The lyrics were very often about illicit romance ("I Think We're Alone Now", "Stairway to Heaven," etc.), and the very name "rock and roll" was taken from physical immorality. Many Christians initially opposed it, but when CCM made it "Christian," it somehow became okay. (And the earliest CCM was all rock.) The rock style of CCM still has that tendency to build up the physical tension without release, which is why churches that use it often get real excited during the music.

Concerning syncopation, here is what a music dictionary says about it: "An abnormal metric pattern produced by an emphasis on the normally weak beats, e.g., the second or fourth in 4/4 time or the second or third in 3/4 time" (The Harvard Brief Dictionary of Music, by Willi Apel and Ralph Daniel, p. 293). Syncopation can be used properly and often is in some music genres. The point is that rock uses it exclusively, and that is how the stress builds up in the body from a rock song. This is why in a rock concert, the fans are jumping up and down, etc. The tension must be released somehow.

Jon has been comparing hymn origins to folk songs, and I don't mind that. I actually said it first, if you'll look back on the thread. But folk music was already a long established genre, and did not have the musical drawbacks that rock has. I play (guitar) and sing a folk song or two to my students every time I give a final exam, and they love it! It gets them relaxed and ready to take the test. Imagine if I played a rock song to my students before the test. They'd be all hyper, and not able to settle down, relax and, take the test.
I actually like a lot of folk music. I did not mean hymns being set to the music sung by people in taverns (typically folk music) to be a negative. But I think that is where our conversation went south.

What I mean is hymns used the music that was popular at the time for certain types of songs (songs that were easily sung by a group of people). I don't mean they originated in taverns, but that this is why a type of song is used there. Nobody goes to a bar expecting the.crowd to sing opera.

My point was that hymns used a tupe if music that was secular at the time (sometimes simply using secular music). I view this as a good thing. These songs were purposely easy to sing and play.

The problem with Christian Rock here is I never claimed that churches use Christian Rock in worship. They dont. They use Contemporary Worship music (I gave you an example that we use, and you agreed it was not what you define as "rock").

Somewhere I mentioned Ravel (that I like Ravel). His music was called explicit at the time (and he agreed). Interesting how people are affected by music.

I can't imagine listening to Journey (I like Journey) and thinking "wow, this is building up tension". I don't know any of their songs about sex or drugs. I do know that their pianist is a Christian who puts out solo Christian paino albums on the side. I've never listened to them. But his wife is Paula White....so there's that.

Maybe I can put the whole "Greensleeves" thing to rest. It's actually in a minor key, so that means it has no influence on hymns, since they are virtually never in a minor key. Well, there is "What Child Is This?" but it's done to the tune of Greensleeves, right? (I play both songs in the key of E minor.)
Yes, there is "What Child is This?".

I like "The Water is Wide". That would be a great tune for a hymn.

But I'd still prefer Contemporary Worship music.

The Bible does not have to specifically say that only certain types of music and instruments are acceptable. God in His perfect wisdom has given prohibitions that apply to all areas of life unless it is proven from Scripture that those prohibitions do not apply to anything that has to do with certain areas of life.

God commands us not to be conformed to this world:

Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Those who say that this command does not apply to any kinds of instrumental music or musical instruments that the world uses in its evil activities must prove from Scripture why this command does not apply to any of the world's musical instruments or kinds of instrumental music.

Anyone who takes the position that God approves of the use of all musical instruments and all kinds of instrumental music in corporate worship has the burden of proof of showing where the Scripture teaches us that is true. If one cannot show from Scripture that is true, he cannot validly claim that Romans 12:2a does not apply to any of the world's musical instruments and kinds of music.
So you would be opposed to churches using a paino (that was first a worldly instrument), obviously against Christians having birthday party's for their children, married couples wearing wedding rings, etc.

I get it. We do need to be set apart.

I was asking soecifically, however, why you believe a type of music (the style) is "occult".
That is the part that seemed odd because the music genre itself did not originated from the occult.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I'm sorry about the confusion, perhaps I was unclear but, I did not claim you linked to "tavern songs" I claimed you linked to articles about "drinking songs" in your post #72. Here's what I said:


My point was simply that, as JonC was suggesting, "tavern songs" is being used in a distinct way to say every-day music of common people.
It does not mean that it is music reserved for drunks or restricted to ill-reputed seedy dives. What I was pointing out is that this gives a distinctively different impression than to say "drinking songs" or "bar songs". Your linked articles and the texts therein repeatedly kept treating them as synonymous.

I do not know what a "drinking song" even is. (even if drunks in a happy state do often enjoy bursting out into song).
I do think it meaningful to refer to "tavern music" in reference to some periods between 16-19th century Western culture, inasmuch as taverns were a common hub of community life and social interaction attended by many people in the community to include politicians, businessmen, clergy etc. It gives a mistaken impression to suggest they are the same.
Thanks for the explanation. The whole "tavern song" thing started with Jon claiming that people who opposed CCM were hypocritical since hymns were originally influenced by "tavern songs." I linked to a couple of essays that debunked that idea, which you commented that I had linked to. The whole thing got confusing.

I actually like a lot of folk music. I did not mean hymns being set to the music sung by people in taverns (typically folk music) to be a negative. But I think that is where our conversation went south.

What I mean is hymns used the music that was popular at the time for certain types of songs (songs that were easily sung by a group of people). I don't mean they originated in taverns, but that this is why a type of song is used there. Nobody goes to a bar expecting the.crowd to sing opera.

My point was that hymns used a tupe if music that was secular at the time (sometimes simply using secular music). I view this as a good thing. These songs were purposely easy to sing and play.
What's a "tupe"? (Kidding.) And did you completely miss the post I wrote about the "Gospel music" of the late 19th century and how that is most of what we sing in churches today? The origin of that music was completely Christian. I have a book by Alfred B. Smith which tells 118 stories of such songs (which would be 1/5 of the typical modern hymnbook.) All of the stories are how God worked for the songs to be written. I'm not saying that never happens, but I've never seen a book like that for CCM artists.
The problem with Christian Rock here is I never claimed that churches use Christian Rock in worship. They dont. They use Contemporary Worship music (I gave you an example that we use, and you agreed it was not what you define as "rock").
I don't get how you can make a blanket statement like this. Have you been to all modern churches? Actually churches do use "Christian rock" in worship. I'm a witness. Have you forgotten the story I gave about the church we visited that played very loud rock and gave my wife physical distress?
Somewhere I mentioned Ravel (that I like Ravel). His music was called explicit at the time (and he agreed). Interesting how people are affected by music.

I can't imagine listening to Journey (I like Journey) and thinking "wow, this is building up tension". I don't know any of their songs about sex or drugs. I do know that their pianist is a Christian who puts out solo Christian paino albums on the side. I've never listened to them. But his wife is Paula White....so there's that.
My point was not that all rock is about sex or drugs. It was that the origin of the genre was.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
This is a complete myth. You cannot name a single hymn that came from a tavern song.

Here is an essay about this accusation against the Wesleys by someone who did the research you could have done: Wesleys' Tavern Songs

Here is another about the charge that Luther used drinking songs: Which Of Our Favorite Hymns Are Rewritten "bar" Songs?

We do have Christian music from folk songs, however: "I Have Decided" (India), "What Child Is This" (England), etc.

Look through a hymnbook. Every song has the author of the music on the left and the author of the tune on the right. In an appendix in many hymnbooks you can find the sources for many hymns. You will look forever and not find a single tavern source. Instead, you will find great hymnwriters like Charles Gabriel (traveled with the great evangelists), P. P. Bliss (traveled with Moody), John W. Peterson, and Alfred B. Smith (a friend of my grandfather who I have met). Even the great "We Shall Overcome" was patterned after a hymn written by a faithful black pastor named Charles Albert Tindley whose son Elbert was a great singer--traveled with my grandfather for years.

In fact, believe it or not, I wrote a song myself that is in a Japanese hymnbook, and it was not from a tavern song.
Sorry....I hadn't had the time to read the articles. Just caught up and fixed that.

My objection to the articles is that they are posted here but are not quite on topic.

I cannot say if they used drinking songs as the music for their lyrics because I do not know.

I was talking about the type of music (folk songs were sung in taverns because they were easy to learn, easy to sing, and easy to play).

Likewise, when you speak of rock I am not thinking that you mean Megadeath used Elvis's music. I'm not sure that I'd count those two in the same genre anyway. But I was speaking of music styles, not applying different lyrics to songs.

Thanks for the explanation. The whole "tavern song" thing started with Jon claiming that people who opposed CCM were hypocritical since hymns were originally influenced by "tavern songs." I linked to a couple of essays that debunked that idea, which you commented that I had linked to. The whole thing got confusing.
Ummmm. ..... the context was types of music (folk music or popular secular music like that played in taverns).

I apologize if I wasn't clear. The context seems to change on a dime around here. Hard to kerp up.

CCM also does not use stock songs and simply change the lyrics (probably a few exceptions, but I'd think that'd be a copyright issue).

Those who object to CCM are hypocrites because their hymns did the same. Hymns were written in a style that existed secularly at the time. CCM does exactly the same.

BUT if we are honest then we woukd compare hymns to Contemporary Worship misic rather than Christian Rock or CCM as a whole.

What's a "tupe"? (Kidding.) And did you completely miss the post I wrote about the "Gospel music" of the late 19th century and how that is most of what we sing in churches today? The origin of that music was completely Christian. I have a book by Alfred B. Smith which tells 118 stories of such songs (which would be 1/5 of the typical modern hymnbook.) All of the stories are how God worked for the songs to be written. I'm not saying that never happens, but I've never seen a book like that for CCM artists.

I don't get how you can make a blanket statement like this. Have you been to all modern churches? Actually churches do use "Christian rock" in worship. I'm a witness. Have you forgotten the story I gave about the church we visited that played very loud rock and gave my wife physical distress?

My point was not that all rock is about sex or drugs. It was that the origin of the genre was.
I have not been to all modern churches. I have never been to one that uses Christisn Rock. But you also stereotyped CCM as worship music as Christian Rock. So welcome to the club, brother :Biggrin

I'm not into the early rock. It sounds good, and seems to be fun. I think of that show "Happy Days" (which I like) and sick hops (which were before my time).

Here is what is considered the first rock and roll song:


 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sorry....I hadn't had the time to read the articles. Just caught up and fixed that.

My objection to the articles is that they are posted here but are not quite on topic.
I linked to the articles because you made the false point that hymns started out as tavern songs. So yes, the articles were relevant
I cannot say if they used drinking songs as the music for their lyrics because I do not know.

I was talking about the type of music (folk songs were sung in taverns because they were easy to learn, easy to sing, and easy to play).
That's not quite what you said.
Likewise, when you speak of rock I am not thinking that you mean Megadeath used Elvis's music. I'm not sure that I'd count those two in the same genre anyway. But I was speaking of music styles, not applying different lyrics to songs.
I've already told a couple of times a definition of rock from a music prof. I don't believe you've ever interacted with that, so I'm not sure what you believe the rock genre to be. There are subgenres of rock. Elvis sang various songs: country, basic pop, rockabilly, etc. Megadeth is hard rock, heavy metal, quite different from Elvis but rock according to the definition I gave.

Ummmm. ..... the context was types of music (folk music or popular secular music like that played in taverns).

I apologize if I wasn't clear. The context seems to change on a dime around here. Hard to kerp up.

CCM also does not use stock songs and simply change the lyrics (probably a few exceptions, but I'd think that'd be a copyright issue).

Those who object to CCM are hypocrites because their hymns did the same. Hymns were written in a style that existed secularly at the time. CCM does exactly the same.
So I'm a hypocrite? And again, have you even noticed what I said about the classical music source of some hymns? Let's not generalize.
BUT if we are honest then we woukd compare hymns to Contemporary Worship misic rather than Christian Rock or CCM as a whole.
So I've been dishonest? And what, pray tell, is the difference between "Contemporary Worship Music" and "CCM"? I'm not getting the distinction. Pardon my ignorance.
 
Last edited:

Scripture More Accurately

Well-Known Member
No, they don't. Precisely the opposite is the case. One would need to demonstrate that specific instruments or styles are verbotten and where. My guess is you are aware that you cannot do so and therefore wish to draw or adapt an arbitrary line somewhere and then shift the burden of proof.

Truth be told, neither side could prove or demonstrate that particular instruments or styles are either permitted or forbidden. The Bible simply does not spell out either case in any detail.
So, you are one of these Christians who believes that smoking, pornography, drug use, etc. are all acceptable for Christians because none of them are specifically "verboten" in Scripture?

So you would be opposed to churches using a paino (that was first a worldly instrument), obviously against Christians having birthday party's for their children, married couples wearing wedding rings, etc.

I get it. We do need to be set apart.

I was asking soecifically, however, why you believe a type of music (the style) is "occult".
That is the part that seemed odd because the music genre itself did not originated from the occult.
Who says that rock music did not originate from the occult?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
So I'm a hypocrite? And again, have you even noticed what I said about the classical music source of some hymns? Let's not generalize.

So I've been dishonest? And what, pray tell, is the difference between "Contemporary Worship Music" and "CCM"? I'm not getting the distinction. Pardon my ignorance.
I did not call you dishonest. To be fair, I have no way of knowing but I believe you are honest.

Yes, I can help. And I should have categorized my music better (this was my mistake, as I contributed to the confusion).


Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) is a category of music that combines popular secular music styles with Christian lyrics. Within CCM there are genres that reflect each popular music style. There is Christian Rock (Skillet, for example), Christian Pop (TobyMac, for example), Christian Metal (Demon Humter, for example), Christian Country (Anne Wilson, for example), etc.

Christian Worship Music (CWM) was at one time considered a sub-genre of CCM. The issue is CWM does not use use a secular music genre. CWM uses simplified harmonies, typically four basic chords, and is designed for congregational singing.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Who says that rock music did not originate from the occult?
It originated from combining influences of Blues, Rhythm and Blues and Country music. The first recorded rock song is suggested as "Rocket 88" (video above). Whether this was the 1st, I dint know. But it was one of the earliest.

The more important question -

Who says rock and roll DID originate with the occult and what is their evidence?

So, you are one of these Christians who believes that smoking, pornography, drug use, etc. are all acceptable for Christians because none of them are specifically "verboten" in Scripture?
Pornography and drug use is addresses in Scripture.

@Scripture More Accurately

This is an illustration of what you are doing:

"Singing without using musical instruments is demonic because Scripture does not say we can sing without accompaniment."

"Using a paino in church is satanic because the paino is a worldly instrument".

"Wearing a wedding ring is a sin because worldly people wear wedding rings."


You made a claim and seem shocked that people ask you to back up that claim.
Nobody cares what you believe. We want to know why you believe it, where you got your opinions.

As ot stands it appears you are simply making false accusations and unwarranted claims which is sinful (and yes, I can back that up with Scripture, including a commandment).
 
So, you are one of these Christians who believes that smoking, pornography, drug use, etc. are all acceptable for Christians because none of them are specifically "verboten" in Scripture?
So, you are one of these Christians who doesn't realize that (with the possible exception of smoking) that they clearly are?

1 Galatians 5:9-21
Yup...pretty clearly addresses those specifically and many more passages besides.
Matt. 5:28
1 Cor. 6:18
Eph 5:3
Eph 5: 18
Rev. 21: 8
 

Scripture More Accurately

Well-Known Member
1 Galatians 5:9-21
That's odd. I do not see anything specifically about pornography in that passage. What version are you using that has that word in it?

@Scripture More Accurately

This is an illustration of what you are doing:

"Singing without using musical instruments is demonic because Scripture does not say we can sing without accompaniment."

"Using a paino in church is satanic because the paino is a worldly instrument".

"Wearing a wedding ring is a sin because worldly people wear wedding rings."

You made a claim and seem shocked that people ask you to back up that claim.
Nobody cares what you believe. We want to know why you believe it, where you got your opinions.

As ot stands it appears you are simply making false accusations and unwarranted claims which is sinful (and yes, I can back that up with Scripture, including a commandment).
Several people have written books about the demonic character and origins of rock music. Many secular rock musicians have testified that rock music is demonic music. It's regrettable that you apparently are unaware of the literature pertaining to this subject.

As for your illustrations:

No, I do not hold that singing without musical instruments is demonic. There are passages in Scripture where people sang without any mention of musical instruments.

I have never made the claim that using a piano in church is satanic because it is a worldly instrument.

I have never said that wearing a wedding ring is a sin. Scripture provides sufficient basis for holding otherwise.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
That's odd. I do not see anything specifically about pornography in that passage. What version are you using that has that word in it?
Sorry, I thought you meant sexually immoral pornography.

I guess whatever kind of pornography that is not sexually immoral would be fine.

Several people have written books about the demonic character and origins of rock music. Many secular rock musicians have testified that rock music is demonic music. It's regrettable that you apparently are unaware of the literature pertaining to this subject.

As for your illustrations:

No, I do not hold that singing without musical instruments is demonic. There are passages in Scripture where people sang without any mention of musical instruments.

I have never made the claim that using a piano in church is satanic because it is a worldly instrument.

I have never said that wearing a wedding ring is a sin. Scripture provides sufficient basis for holding otherwise.
Several people have written books about Christian rock reaching people with the gospel also.

I don't really care what books people write (pro or against music).

I am asking you why you believe that rock music originated among the occult.


What passages are you speaking of where Scripture states people sang without instruments?

Why is Christians playing a paino NOT glorifying Satan? A paino is a worldly instrument.

Why is wearing a wedding ring NOT a sin? It originated in ancient pagan cultures and our secular culture uses wedding rings.

What about songs heavy in harmony (like many hymns)? That was not done in Scripture (it's a secular Western trait).

It appears that to you God does not matter - you are the standard by which you decide if something is godly.
 

Scripture More Accurately

Well-Known Member
Several people have written books about Christian rock reaching people with the gospel also.

I don't really care what books people write (pro or against music).

I am asking you why you believe that rock music originated among the occult.
I have already answered your question. There is plenty of factual information that many have provided that shows the demonic character and origins of rock music. Apparently, it is time for you to do some research.
 
Top