NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Probably not. But it was worldly since it wasn't spiritual, correct?
-
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!
Are musical styles amoral?
- Thread starter Jordan Kurecki
- Start date
Are you aware that the classical style was very much associated with the church when it was first being produced,the classical style also reflects the glory of God with it's structure and order, in fact there were musicians who wrote specifically for the glory of God, one artists in particular would sign initials to his music such as F.T.G.O.G. for something like for the glory of god or W.T.H.O.J. With the help of Jesus
Rock music is chaotic and expresses confusion, and was created by lost people, for the purpose of rebellion, you know this is true.
Trying to compare classical music to singing happy birthday is a far stretch.
my main point in saying 80s alternative was bad is not because it is secular, but because it is in fact, worldly and carnal..
The kind of music we listen to should reflect the honor and glory of God and bring praise to him, how does something chaotic and disorderly do this? something that incites such rebellion in man?
in response to your earlier happy birthday question, Singing Happy Birthday to encourage someone is perfectly acceptable, encouraging people is good and commanded in the word of God.
Listening to secular rock music for self pleasure is not.
Classical Music reflects the character of God and it reflects the order and structure of his universe.
Rock music reflects the character of man, with it's syncopated beat,rythyms, and rebellion.
Classical Music with the exception of a few artists is very orderly, you can point to ungodly classical music artists and somehow claim that it refutes listening to the hymns... but back in the day even those classical artists were still restrained by the rules of the music that were being followed back then, because music was not as developed (or should i see devolved) as it is now, so much was restrained on the part of expressing sin and rebellion, though this can be seen in some of Beethovens darker stuff.
Back in the day of Ancient Greece if you were playing drums with a syncopated beat they would think throw you in jail because they would think you were trying to invite a rebellion, the Greek realized the power of syncopated rhythms, that's why they banned certain rhythms.
it wasn't until the rise of Atheismthat brought about musical rebellion, people started saying (must things be done this way?) it was a form of rebellion, They wanted to be disorderly and chaotic. this can be seen in some of the later classical music periods, Our hymns do not borrow from the rebellious rhythms.
.
Last edited by a moderator:
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
You are of course also aware that much classical music was associated with wicked, ungodly, vile operas with strong sexu@l themes?
You seemed to have back off on 'all secular music is worldly?' If so I think that is a wise choice. There is secular music that there is nothing at all wrong with.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Do you evidence for this please? I have never heard of this.
It seems to me, at the core of all these arguments, particularly those from David Cloud and other IFBs, is Western Culture bias. It seems that only music that came out of Europe and the US in the 1700-1920s is acceptable. This is just wrong, not only factually but also morally. Was there no godly music in Palestine 2000 years ago? What about in North Africa 1500 years ago? Or the Far East today? I guarantee you that these places had music that is not only different from our "Classical Music" and modern hymns, but they certainly differ from each other as well I am sure.
Music is just about the silliest thing to argue over. Unless the lyrics "preach" bad theology or are outright profane, it's all preference.
Music is just about the silliest thing to argue over. Unless the lyrics "preach" bad theology or are outright profane, it's all preference.
Last edited by a moderator:
Some (Bach for example) would sign their works with SDG - Soli Deo Gloria. "Glory to God alone" or (rarely) "Glory to the only God."
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Ding! Ding! Ding!
Music is human interaction. Of course it is moral.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
I find it interesting that the morality of the style often depends on the society or culture around it. For example, those hymns that came straight out of bars or pubs were probably immoral for some. Now, they are beloved and cherished. Same is true for any other style.
If we are created in the image of God, and part of that image means we are creative beings, then that can be both abused and redeemed. I like to think that music, even the style, is redeemable.
There is "some" CCM that I like. However, my friend has grandaughters who listen to this "Christian band"-Skillet. Watch this video (and this one is pretty mild compared to some of their stuff) and explain to me the difference between this and a heavy metal concert.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKY_-kokJHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKY_-kokJHk
Last edited by a moderator:
Just as modes of human interaction. No doubt the Apostles would have disapproved of dithyrambs.
Inspector Javert
Active Member
I'm glad you mention Bach.
Bach may be a good example of how music can be either Christ-honoring or not. While his music overall was Christ-honoring, at the same time, many of his organ concertos were written by him only to demonstrate his virtuosity....
He was so good, he wrote music (organ concertos) which ONLY HE COULD PLAY. Those same pieces are rarely lauded for their inherent beauty and are not often played by anyone even if they are good enough to. Some of his music, then, neither blessed God, nor even blessed other men......they just helped him show-off.
Rarely will someone who preaches against rock-music have anything negative to say about a piano sonata by Franz Liszt, but he was little more in his day than a pure Rock-star. Concert pianists traditionally play with their right-side profile as you may notice.....this is Liszt's contribution. He was very handsome and his right-side was the one he thought the ladies should see. There are accounts of women literally swooning during his concerts; he was pure play-boy and 19th-century rock-star.
Jordan, there is an inherent cultural bias to how people tend to view the music of the era. I maintain it is the purpose of the heart and the audience in view which matters most.
Bach's audience....himself
Liszt's audience..... :flower:the ladies
George Friedrich Handel's "Messiah" was originally not permitted to be played in Churches because it was "secular"....seriously...."secular".
The composer Palestrina saved the Evolution of music (by writing a polyphonic mass the words for which could be understood). It is the Missae Papae Marcelli. Prior to polyphonic music being permitted to be played in Church, the Pope had insisted only on monophonic music (Gregorian Chant) because he maintained the words to polyphonic forms could not be understood and only secular music was polyphonic......this is that Polyphonic stuff originally too secular for the Church:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIvs7C2nW88
Beautiful....but it is more evolved than Gregorian Chant....and it was written by Palestrina to permit this type of modernistic rock-n-roll to be allowed in Churches. These other posters are correct. There is inherent bias by historical period and culture which must be understood when proclaiming any particular music either "worldly" or "spiritual"....I hate to use the phrase that it's "relative"....but, when it comes to music. It really is quite relative most of the time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Inspector Javert
Active Member
Just for fun, examples of masterful....
"Word-painting".....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGTB1q2yEhQ
Listen to how the music itself paints pictures in this Madrigal.
Listen to it during these underlined words:
As Vesta was from Latmos Hill descending,
She spied a maiden queen the same ascending,
Attended on by all the shepherds swain,
To whom Diana's darling came running down amain,
First two by two, then three by three together,
Leaving their goddess all alone, hasted thither;
And mingling with the shepherds of her train,
With mirthful tunes her presences entertain.
Then sang the shepherds and nymphs of Diana
Long live fair Oriana
"Word-painting".....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGTB1q2yEhQ
Listen to how the music itself paints pictures in this Madrigal.
Listen to it during these underlined words:
As Vesta was from Latmos Hill descending,
She spied a maiden queen the same ascending,
Attended on by all the shepherds swain,
To whom Diana's darling came running down amain,
First two by two, then three by three together,
Leaving their goddess all alone, hasted thither;
And mingling with the shepherds of her train,
With mirthful tunes her presences entertain.
Then sang the shepherds and nymphs of Diana
Long live fair Oriana
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh boy, I played music like that for years in clubs.
See the devil salutes? \m/...\m/
....................................O
I got talked into joining a CCM band by a good Baptist pastor who said music is amoral. I tried to play it, but couldn't. It just doesn't work.
Of course music is moral. If not why have religious music?
Also anyone who says music is amoral apparently has lived a sheltered life. There are songs soldiers sing, especially the Brits, that are downright immoral.
I was waiting to have blood drawn for some tests today. A bit flat-panel TV was on the wall tuned to a country music channel. I could not hear the lyrics, but all of the videos included soft pornography shots. That certainly carried a moral message, one that Christians should object to being shown.
Also anyone who says music is amoral apparently has lived a sheltered life. There are songs soldiers sing, especially the Brits, that are downright immoral.
I was waiting to have blood drawn for some tests today. A bit flat-panel TV was on the wall tuned to a country music channel. I could not hear the lyrics, but all of the videos included soft pornography shots. That certainly carried a moral message, one that Christians should object to being shown.
You can't even get "moral" and "immoral" straight.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
Have you ever studied the lives of the composers?
It was part of my homeschool education, under "music appreciation". Most of the material came from mail-in booklets with a CD and biography on each composer. My mom also picked out other books containing some form of bibliography on whoever we were studying. I think we stayed on a particular composer for a week or two.
Handel was a Christian. He wrote "The Messiah." He refused to write music for plays containing "double meaning words" and sexual themes. I remember that in our study on him.
Many of the other composers were not Christians. I think it's a huge stretch to say classical music reflects the character of God. A musical composition reflects the character of whoever wrote it--if a particular composition was made to God's glory, awesome! But not all were and I don't think one could correctly claim that most were, either.
We all praise classical music now, but if I remember the studies we did correctly it was pretty controversial for it's time.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Jordan's mind is already made up. He is convinced or most likely conditioned to think that some styles of music are of the devil. Bill Gothard types, some IBF types, and others continue to perpetuate this false teaching using arguments based more on opinion, false science, and personal preferences.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
Not to argue or anything, but I think it's unfair to make assumptions about a band based on the usage of this particular hand sign.
I'm not even convinced it's actually a "devil salute" myself, but even assuming it is, how do we know that they're aware of that? It's generally just seen as a way of expressing how much the music rocks, or to put it differently "this is awesome!". Based on my experience, I think few people actually believe or see it as a sign of evil. So if it was actually evil, I'd tend to pass off it's use as a sign of ignorance, as opposed to making assumptions about their loyalties. But IDK, maybe I just try to assume the best about others until I actually know something about them.
Last edited by a moderator: