-
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!
Why I'm thankful God convicted about Rock'nRoll
- Thread starter lilrabbi
- Start date
T
Travelsong
Guest
I think you are trying to make some sort of distinction between sin and accountability. I sincerely wish you would put forth an effort to systemize your thinking and present it in a cohesive manner.
Man has a sin nature. Because of that sin nature he sins. The sin may be deliberately (and usually is) a result of rebellion against the breaking of God's will. I take exception to an absolute statement saying that ALL sin ALWAYS is rooted in the heart. That is false. If you predicated your statement with most, instead of ALL, then I would be more inclined to agree with you. There are very few absolute statements that one can make and still be true. It is one of the first signs of spotting a false statement--look for those absolute qualifiers. The only absolutes we can be absolutely sure of are those that God has decreed in His Word. Consider this statement:
Psalms 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
An infant sins as soon as he is born--speaking lies. We, in our natural minds don't like to accept that statement. But this is God's Word. I accept what God teaches by faith. Babies lie. They sin. Thus if an infant dies will it go to heaven because of its sin. Yes, I believe so. I believe that God in His mercy will take that infant to heaven. But how much of that sin can be attributed to the reasoning ability of that infant to think out and deceive?
Sin is sin.
In application let's go back to Aaron's assertion: "All rock is sin."
True statement.
But as an infant tells a lie, and possibly may not even be aware of it, so an unsaved person may sin in the area of rock music and may not even be aware of it. He can only be aware of the sinfulness of the sin of rock if the Holy Spirit enlightens him to it. He is spiritually dead. Dead people don't sin.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
--Except the law had said: Rock is sin, I had not know sin. True?
Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
--The sin of rock music is dead; because the laws concerning are not known til one is saved, and his spirit is enlightened by the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
--It is the Spirit of God, not of the world, that is given us that we might understand the things of God--such as: Rock is sin. An unsaved person cannot know this. Why?
Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
--As the Ephesians once were, so all the unsaved are--dead in trespasses and sin. A dead person cannot sin. The Holy Spirit does not enlighten him to these spiritual things. They know right from wrong as far as God's moral law is concerned, but that is not the point of this discussion.
2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
--There is a change in a saved person's life. Now he knows that rock music is sin. It always was sin. Now the Holy Spirit enlightens him to its sinfulness. He once was dead, but now is alive. He can now discern its sinfunless. The Holy Spirit convicts, and if he is obedient to the Word of God, and the conviction of the Holy Spirit he will give up the Rock music. "He that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."
DHK
Psalms 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
An infant sins as soon as he is born--speaking lies. We, in our natural minds don't like to accept that statement. But this is God's Word. I accept what God teaches by faith. Babies lie. They sin. Thus if an infant dies will it go to heaven because of its sin. Yes, I believe so. I believe that God in His mercy will take that infant to heaven. But how much of that sin can be attributed to the reasoning ability of that infant to think out and deceive?
Sin is sin.
In application let's go back to Aaron's assertion: "All rock is sin."
True statement.
But as an infant tells a lie, and possibly may not even be aware of it, so an unsaved person may sin in the area of rock music and may not even be aware of it. He can only be aware of the sinfulness of the sin of rock if the Holy Spirit enlightens him to it. He is spiritually dead. Dead people don't sin.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
--Except the law had said: Rock is sin, I had not know sin. True?
Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
--The sin of rock music is dead; because the laws concerning are not known til one is saved, and his spirit is enlightened by the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
--It is the Spirit of God, not of the world, that is given us that we might understand the things of God--such as: Rock is sin. An unsaved person cannot know this. Why?
Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
--As the Ephesians once were, so all the unsaved are--dead in trespasses and sin. A dead person cannot sin. The Holy Spirit does not enlighten him to these spiritual things. They know right from wrong as far as God's moral law is concerned, but that is not the point of this discussion.
2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
--There is a change in a saved person's life. Now he knows that rock music is sin. It always was sin. Now the Holy Spirit enlightens him to its sinfulness. He once was dead, but now is alive. He can now discern its sinfunless. The Holy Spirit convicts, and if he is obedient to the Word of God, and the conviction of the Holy Spirit he will give up the Rock music. "He that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."
DHK
T
Travelsong
Guest
Romans 5:12 and Corinthians 15:22 are the absolutes. Death, both physical and spiritual has fallen to all men. Man's will has forever been corrupted such that he rebels against God from birth. All sin results from this.
1)There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that God sets people up to sin through no fault of their own.
2) There is no indication that sin has it's origin anywhere but in the heart.
Honestly, for the rest of your post I think you are playing nothing but semantics.
You are trying to lure me into a definition shell game with the word "sin" in order to draw attention away from your inability to show sin having it's origin outside the heart (that is the very corrupted will of man).
Let's use a defintion which is practical to this discussion.
Sin is any action contrary to God's law. (1 John 3:4)
**Using Scripture, can you show anywhere that men can unintentionally act against God's law?
Using Scripture can you show where God judges anything external and independant of a heart motive as sinful?
** Edited to say poorly framed question.
Should be "From Scripture show that man can violate God's law by an act independant of his corrupted heart."
[ April 01, 2005, 08:26 PM: Message edited by: Travelsong ]
Leviticus 4:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them:
Le 4:2
2. If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord--a soul--an individual. All sins may be considered, in a certain sense, as committed "through ignorance," error, or misapprehension of one's true interests. The sins, however, referred to in this law were unintentional violations of the ceremonial laws,--breaches made through haste, or inadvertency of some negative precepts, which, if done knowingly and wilfully, would have involved a capital punishment.
"do against any of them"--To bring out the meaning, it is necessary to supply, "he shall bring a sin offering." (JFB)
Le 4:2
2. If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord--a soul--an individual. All sins may be considered, in a certain sense, as committed "through ignorance," error, or misapprehension of one's true interests. The sins, however, referred to in this law were unintentional violations of the ceremonial laws,--breaches made through haste, or inadvertency of some negative precepts, which, if done knowingly and wilfully, would have involved a capital punishment.
"do against any of them"--To bring out the meaning, it is necessary to supply, "he shall bring a sin offering." (JFB)
T
Travelsong
Guest
Exactly DHK!
"Breaches made through haste, or inadvertency of of some negative precepts."
This only makes sense because God delivered His commandments and charged the Israelites accountable to following them. A sin of ignorance was failure to follow God's commandment to obey all the Law.
It is still sin and it still comes from a motive of the heart! A man who picks up sticks on the Sabbath is a man who does not have enough love for God to even search His commandments. He does not and cannot love God enough to search, remember and keep all God's commandments. This man's salvation could only be made effectual by faith pointing towards the cross.
Sin has always been the same for everybody DHK. Sin springs naturally from our corrupted hearts, not through random acts of chance.
It is the things of God that are "spiritually discerned"; not the natural man. (I used to read it that way too. And it was like "what does that mean?" But it is "they [the things of God] are foolishness unto him...because they are spiritually discerned")
But we don't just change everything just for the sake of "change". Else people who listened to classical/traditional would have to change that too.
This is just a statement you (and Aaron and others) are making; and when it is shown that there is no scriptural support for it; then you must claim "well; God just doesn't like it". Then, when further pressed for proof, then we get people's testimonies; "convictions"; science claims; what worldly rock musicians or people listening to it have said done; and see! since these things are condemned in the Bible as sin; it's the music that is sinful (not [just] the people's hearts; and hence we get into the debate about the heart and sin). So now; when that is frther dismissed because the music does not affect all like that; then "If you're a Christian it does. God just does not like it; and convicts Christians of it. So we have gone around the cycle once agaih; but have never come close to the real bullseye of real scriptural proof. Yet; we can make statements like this as if God had thundered it down from the flaming mount (and of course; CCM'ers are too busy worshipping their "golden calf" to notice!)
So what all of this would mean is that all of us who say we are not convicted; are not saved! Or; we were convicted and lied to ourselves that we weren't. This is a serious charge (and it would be no wonder then that the anti-CCM'ers would be so critical of CCM fans and artists and churches that use it).
But once again; this is all based on the cycle; and not scripture. Starting from one point on the cycle, and jumping around to the next argument; all of which are mutually self-proving; you have basically in effect forced not only your convictions on every other Christian; but now have added a new definition of Christianity that is beyone Scripture; appealing, basically, to special revelation from God. There is so much hypocrisy in this alone; as it smacks of the errors of both radical charismatics and the Catholists we debate here; both of which harshly condemned by the anti-rock crowd for those errors. They defend their unbiblical doctrines and practices by "church tradition", but go about it in a different way ("oral tradition passed down to the early fathers"). The idea that "Church music should sound like the old hymns" is also "tradition", and it's by this that more modern forms are being judged. NOT from some unwritten laws from God about rhythm accent or culture that happen be drawn along the lines of what else; but culture!
You compare this to "the law had said 'you shall not covet'"; but that WAS a written law! We cannot just make up new laws of our own and mold it into this principle and effect put them in God's mouth. (And unsaved do get a sense that things they do are wrong. What they don't naturally know (or "discern") is that it is "sin" against any "Law of God". So there are universal moral laws that any man can get a sense of; so this claim of "only the unsaved can't sense what is wrong with rock" falls from both perspectives.)
God convicts us of things that either are clear scripture that we know but ignore or disregard; or special instances that may not have existed in Bible times, yet general or special principles carry over (fraud committed via electronic means; "should I say such to so-and so at this time", etc) or questionable things that may not be bad in themselves; but WE are unsure of, and not doing in "faith". Of course; then we have leading CCM/rock critic Jeff Godwin who says "God doesn't HAVE to convict us to forsake something that clearly violates His Holy Word. True Christians are supposed to know better. Why? Because they read their Bible! If God says it's wrong, it's wrong." So we go around the cycle again. Now God's word does "say" it; so you shouldn't have to be convicted.
The anti-rock/CCM movement cannot even get its own arguments straight; and have tried every possible argument and combination of arguments except clear universal scriptural principle. It is they who need to go to the scriptures and search their own hearts before they try to define for others what God's Laws are.
Eric you are only biased to the arguments which I have presented because the topic is so controversial, i.e., rock music. If you take another topic, and fit the same topic into the exact same verses and theology, it makes perfect sense. There are many that think that there is nothing wrong with smoking cigarettes, marijuana, TM, evolution, etc. When they get saved their minds are opened to these things (not by special revelation) but by the illumination of the Holy Spirit in understanding the Word of God. The same is true of Rock music, though it is obvious you disagree with me on this subject because of the nature of its controversy.
DHK
DHK
This is almost as if you cannot read, will not read, or cannot understand that which is written. They are not sins of the heart for the simple reason they are sins of ignorance. Both the commentary and the Bible itself explain this quite clearly. What is your problem in understanding? A sin of ignorance is done out of ignorance, not out of willful disobedience of the heart--hence the word "ignorance." How plain can it be!
DHK
T
Travelsong
Guest
This is almost as if you cannot read, will not read, or cannot understand that which is written. They are not sins of the heart for the simple reason they are sins of ignorance. Both the commentary and the Bible itself explain this quite clearly. What is your problem in understanding? A sin of ignorance is done out of ignorance, not out of willful disobedience of the heart--hence the word "ignorance." How plain can it be!
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]What you do not understand DHK is that the penalty for the sin demands accountability! it is still sin because it finds it's root in the natural depraved state. The sin offering was repentance for not knowing what you should have known. It was not a sacrifice given on a whim or when you had a funny suspicion. It was a sacrifice offered when you came to the knowledge of your offense to God.
In other words, a man should have known God did not want him to pick sticks up on the Sabbath, because the resources to know this commandment were available to him. God directly handed the Israelites His Law and commanded them to seek His will in every conceivable facet of living. The fact that it was impossible for them to do so is no different for the Israelites than it is or was for any other person in history.
The point is thus reaffirmed:
Without God's intervention we are naturally opposed to the truth of His Word. We will not have pure communion with Him in our present bodies.
Are we getting closer to agreement?
Surely you jest. A sacrifice had to be given because sin was committed--not because it was of the heart, but because it was sin. Period. There was no motive involved. You are reading into Scripture that which is not there. A sin of ignorance is a sin of ignorance. Look up the word in the dictionary!
DHK
T
Travelsong
Guest
Surely you jest. A sacrifice had to be given because sin was committed--not because it was of the heart, but because it was sin. Period. There was no motive involved. You are reading into Scripture that which is not there. A sin of ignorance is a sin of ignorance. Look up the word in the dictionary!
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]The ignorance is sin because they were given the commandment to know and obey all of God's commandments and statutes. It's as simple as that.
Look at it this way:
If I as your authority provide you with a set of laws and hold you accountable to obey every one of them, I am just in penalizing you equally whether or not you memorize and obey every law.
Thus the phrase "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
T
Travelsong
Guest
Study the passage of Scripture in question. That is not what it says, is it? </font>[/QUOTE]Sure it does. It says this penalty is given for not obeying the commandment to obey all commandments. That is the sin from ignorance.
Once again, the sin offering was given when you came to the knowledge of your offense. It was an offering which demanded repentance for not doing what one ought to have done.
The point was to show that man is incapable of following all of God's commandments even if given them. Why were they incapable? Their sin nature.
You are right in that one aspect. Man is incapable of keeping all the law. He breaks the law--whether deliberately or not. All laws are not deliberately broken. Ask (if possible) an infant who breaks God's law as soon as it is born speaking lies. Within the bounds of God's law there is mercy. Perhaps you don't recognize that. Our God is a merciful God. It is only by the mercy of God, and not by the innocence of the child that the child will enter into Heaven. All have sinned.
All have sinned--whether deliberately or not. If you can't understand that, I cannot help you. The wages of sin is death--the wages of all sin, no matter who or from what intent they are committed: from ignorance or not. You make a grave mistake when you make an absolute statement saying that ALL sin is rooted in the heart. Your absolute qualifier immediately qualifies your statement as false.
DHK
All have sinned--whether deliberately or not. If you can't understand that, I cannot help you. The wages of sin is death--the wages of all sin, no matter who or from what intent they are committed: from ignorance or not. You make a grave mistake when you make an absolute statement saying that ALL sin is rooted in the heart. Your absolute qualifier immediately qualifies your statement as false.
DHK
T
Travelsong
Guest
DHK, I do understand what you are saying. Completely. I agree with it. What you are missing however is that sin whether imputed or not is a direct result of our nature. We simply cannot of our own obey God or even desire to obey God. As a result of this we speak and act of our own rebellious prideful nature from birth.
Now again, we see hundreds of passages dealing with sin in the heart, God's judgement of the heart, Christ's perfect love for God as fulfillment of the law.
Where is this doctrine of accidental sin existing outside the nature of the heart? If there is such sin, what does it profit me to be aware of it?
Now again, we see hundreds of passages dealing with sin in the heart, God's judgement of the heart, Christ's perfect love for God as fulfillment of the law.
Where is this doctrine of accidental sin existing outside the nature of the heart? If there is such sin, what does it profit me to be aware of it?
But these are just variations of certain sins, that do directly violate the commandments against those sins. Mind altering drugs [and cigarretes can be included as they have recently been shown to be such!] would fall under the same category as drunkenness in such scriptures as Eph.5:18. That is why it is sinful; because they basically do the same type of thing as alcohol, and are thus taken for the same reason; selfish pleasure. (The well known, proven short and long term negative physical effects are also similar). Basically a new medium with a new name. (It actually is also the "sorcery" (Gk.pharmakia) of Rev.9:21, and thus is "directly" implicated).
Also, TM is a false religion, so is obviously condemned; though this particular religion wasn't mentioned. Evolution also is a belief that generally denies God (or at best diminishes Him down to basically a "first cause" who otherwise does not impose moral laws on the world), so is also contrary to the Bible. It technically could be considered a false religion; though it has been masked as a new category called "science".
But it's the CCM critics' attempts to prove that the music in question is "immoral" because of its rhythm that do not have enough support, judging from the charges made so far. Rather than being a direct variation of any particular sin, they are remotely connected by indirect "associations" and hypothesis.
And it seems the real "bias" is coming from the anti-rock side; with the cultural issue ultimately coloring the "guidelines" of good and bad music. Those who accept cpntemporary styles are the ones on the defensive here. We are not the ones against any style.
How does this relate to Christian Rock in any way whatsoever?
In a non bias opinion, I myself still see no valid arguement as for why Christian Rock is a sin. The music isn't hurting anyone, it's not making people do stupid things that would cause God to be angry. Seriously, all i can see are opinions. And i even see them on both sides, i do see valid and invalid arguments on the part of the Pro Christain Rock/CCM side.
The problem with all of this is that none of us are looking at this from a non bias standpoint and we need to if we are ever going to make a valid point.
In a non bias opinion, I myself still see no valid arguement as for why Christian Rock is a sin. The music isn't hurting anyone, it's not making people do stupid things that would cause God to be angry. Seriously, all i can see are opinions. And i even see them on both sides, i do see valid and invalid arguments on the part of the Pro Christain Rock/CCM side.
The problem with all of this is that none of us are looking at this from a non bias standpoint and we need to if we are ever going to make a valid point.
T
Travelsong
Guest
Dang! I guess that settles that then.