You've GOT to watch this - please

[Aaron]

Now, are you prepared or not to support your supposition that all forms of music are hallowed?

Since tiny has bailed, I'll answer myself. There is no support whatever that all forms of music are hallowed. Quite the opposite, really. In only one place in the Scriptures where all kinds of musick are said to be consistent with worship, it is in the worship of Nebuchadnezzar's idol. (Dan. 3:5-15)

Well, I dunno. Was the banjo sacred to African Voodoo?

No, the banjo was not used in voodoo rituals. No matter how employed it could not assist the worshipper in entering altered states of consciousness.

 

[Rufus_1611]

BTW, your accusation against MWSmith and Jaci is slanderous and laughable. You feel comfy spreading lies about fellow Christians?

The MWSmith Runes and Jaci's Lingerie shows are visually documented and without dispute. If you can argue even the most basic and obvious points that are proven by factual visible evidence, then I can dissuade you on nothing.

 

[tinytim]

Aaron, it is not so much that I bailed... as I have been busy today. I intentionally stayed away from this thread yesterday because I was getting too angry to be useful.... so I backed away, and if you look at my post this morning, you will see that i was in a much better mood...

I know we will never agree. So what is the point of arguing about it?

I'll never convince you, and you will never convince me. I'll meet you in Heaven to see which one is right!

I do have one question. One that I don't think I have ever seen you address...

How do you feel about Gospel music... Like Andre Crouch, Kirk Franklin, Shirley Cesear, all the Black choirs... that style. I see you are not racist, so can you say anything good about this style? Or is it of the devil also?

I am not setting a trap.. I just have never seen you address this...
I will not argue about it, I am just interested in your thoughts.

I may not have time this evening until tonight to come back to this thread, but I will look in when I get a chance.

tim

 

[rbell]

A. S. Herbert, "Worship in Ancient Israel" (John Knox Press)

Clyde Francisco, "Old Testament Worship" (Broadman Press)

"Mercer Dictionary of the Bible"

Amihai Mazar, "Archaeology of the Land of the Bible" (Doubleday Books)

16 or so other sources in a 48-page thesis I wrote in 1990...not looking for that right now (in the attic).

2 years of "Old Testament Archaeology and ancient biblical backgrounds"

Here are some OT instruments:

Tambourine (percussion).
Psaltery (stringed/percussion--similar to hammered dulcimer)
cymbals (percussion--some were gong-type; others were bells and similar)
trumpet (brass/wind)
shofar (wind)
lyre/harp (stringed--two types, possibly sequentially developed; possibly simultaneously in use--the davidic lyre (kinnor, or harp); and nevel (membrane lyre)--which may have had a percussive element as well as plucked stringed element)
sistrum (percussion--a rattle of sorts)
menaanim (sometimes includes sistrum, but probably broader term) includes clappers and percussive noisemakers
toph (percussion--a "membranophone" (hide stretched over a frame), or in other words, a drum. Word from Hebrew "tophet," which means "to smite or strike," indicating how it was played).
khalil (wind)--more like an oboe


New Testament instruments include aulos (flute/recorder/oboe family), kithara (harp), salpinx (trumpet), kumbala (cymbal), chalkos (gong).

studying under some celebrated biblical archaeologists did have some benefit.:tongue3:

 

[rbell]

The MWSmith Runes and Jaci's Lingerie shows are visually documented and without dispute. If you can argue even the most basic and obvious points that are proven by factual visible evidence, then I can dissuade you on nothing.

then post 'em.

 

[James_Newman]

then post 'em.

Wouldn't that violate some kind of BB policy? :thumbs:

 

[Eric B]

Was Paul a holist when he said, a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? You need to get a clue.

You have to prove that rhythm is leaven. Your whole argument starts from these unproven correlations that are treated as if they are their own authority.

Revisionist history. The sources I cited are both pro-African paganism. For them, these are virtues of their music.

And just as I said, the source is a non-Christian to whom all things are impure. That "pro-African" line won't work, because he obviously is portrayed as a "bad person", and his support of "African beats" is supposed to be the ultimate proof they arebad.

cc's request was for empirical evidence of the sensual nature of certain kinds of music. What you need to counter it is empirical evidence against it, not some fable you make up in your own head.

It was not empirical evidence, it was a bunch of associations generalized from etymological references, that ignore the spiritual aspect of the issue. That to the impure, all things are impure, so what they called the music and used it for does not necessarily make it wrong for everyone else.

That's a lie, but for the sake of argument, indulge me one more time, for rbell's sake.

No ancient Hebrew notation exists, except perhaps in the Masoretic texts, and what survives today in the synagogal chant is disconnected from its Hebrew roots by centuries and corrupted by the influence of occupying nations.

But...judging from Paul's admonitions to the Ephesians who contrasted psalms to the sensuality of the surrounding culture, I'm confident the Psalms sounded nothing like what we would call rock/jazz/blues today.

The Lion Encyclopedia of the Bible,
[SIZE=-1](Lion Publishing, 1978, previously Eerdmans Family Encyclopedia of the Bible, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.)[/SIZE]
p. 191 says "And the music seems to have been strongly rhythmic rather than melodic, although there were set tunes to some of the psalms.". What I see happening, is that people read of "harps and strings" in the scriptures, and think of mellow symphonic music, and thus are reading that into the text. However, it was quite different from that style. This is the music of biblical (mid-eastern) culture, not medieval European chants, as people are assuming. While some make a big deal about the drum's absence in scripture, and even claim it should not be used, there were several other percussion instruments mentioned. Totally ignored is the presence of dancing in the Bible. The Hebrew definitions include "twist", "whirl", and even "writhe" (as in pleasure or pain). It may not have been the sensuous dancing of today, but it completely disproves the whole "flesh/Spirit" argument, which is being read into Gal.5:17 and others, and taught with such supposedly "scriptural" authority. (i.e. that any 'fleshy pleasure' makes it "of the flesh" rather than "of the Spirit", and that music therefore should only lead to sitting stiffly or marching) Like music, it was also used negatively (as in the golden calf incident), but [SIZE=-1]NEVER[/SIZE] afterwards forbidden because of that 'association'. The Encyclopedia continues: "Dancing too, was often apart of people's joyful expression of worship". GOD ACCEPTED IT! (Ps.149:3, 2 Sam.6:14-23) This omission of dancing is just not dealing honestly with the scriptures!

So this worship may have looked and sounded somewhat similar to the pagans, but this shows that while music may not be neutral, the context does change it, and that the most important issue is [SIZE=-1]WHO [/SIZE]the worship is actually being directed to, not how much evil a particular style may have been used for.

 

[gekko]

The CCM Rock artist is engaged in sensual fleshly music (regardless of the lyrics) that encourages fornication and adultery.

engaged in sensual fleshly music. wow. i guess by me listening to LeCrae - i get thoughts of goin out and havin sex with every and any girl i see out there on my walk - i must get pretty up about it - i mean - that beat has got to get my hormones workin overtime.

(give me a break. haha)
---

Christian music or "Christian music" as some may say - can be used for two things - maybe more - but two for sure.

1) To Praise God and give him Glory (keep the re-occuring thoughts to yourself on this point - that way we don't get dizzy by reading in circles)

2) To display how God is working in ones life - particularly the life of whom wrote the song - the music puts an emotion to it to further display it all.

[Edit: 3) Just for Fun! ]
---

not all christian music is under the category of "Hymns, psalms and spiritual songs"

"oh but they must or they are of the devil!"

no - they dont. i dont know what the defenition of 'hymns' were 3000 years ago - but i sure as heck know they weren't singin 'Old Rugged Cross' or 'Amazing Grace'

probably 100 years ago - there were probably people who thought today's hymns were of the devil because of the use of piano - today culture has changed. SO LIVE WITH IT.
---

question for Rufus and Aaron:

when you hear CCM music (i dont care if you don't ever listen to it) when you HEAR it - do you feel like goin to go down the street and get jiggy with the next lady you see?

this is a serious question. please answer.
---

"bet you never heard nobody rap the gospel / different sound but the truths the same"
LeCrae - Jesus Muzik
(oh - they show a tattoo - so if you're offended by tattoo's - then don't watch it)

Glance at the word and see
God made the plans of diversity
Is there one godly ethnic group
In the church should we all wear one polyester suit
Or maybe rock sandals and robes, no ham I suppose
When we meet maybe we should only eat salmon and loaves
Should we only like the organ or the violin
I'm inquirin', I admire men up in the choir and women
But one minute, why do some people assume that God's iPod
Got no tunes that got the "boom-bap"
He's with White, with Black, with Lat
With Asian with Rock, Country, Jazz, with Rap

The Ambassador - My Clothes, My Hair

Shawn McDonald - Take My Hand

Paul Wright - Take This Life
---

[Edit]
Aaron and Rufus - and whoever else believes the roots of all music are evil and therefore stay away from it.

Aaron - you're from the heart of America eh? well didn't you know that America started as an evil country? "no but its christian!"
no - it never was - it was evil to the core.
what - you find new land - and kill people to take it over - in other words stealing it. that's a real christian country ya got there.

i suggest you stay away from America - go find some lonesome island or something.
same goes for you as well Rufus.
[/Edit]

 

[Aaron]

I know we will never agree. So what is the point of arguing about it?

I haven't read the entire thread, but what I saw were arbitrary assumptions on the CCM side being postulated as fact in the name of God. Can't let that slide.

How do you feel about Gospel music... Like Andre Crouch, Kirk Franklin, Shirley Cesear,

I can't say that I've ever heard any of these folks. The CCM artists I listened to during my college years were MW Smith, Sandi Patti, Amy Grant, Larnell Harris, etc.

My thoughts about them are, that though they may be sincere, their music is sensual. And if the artists you listed are of the Gospel blues genre, I would say the same thing.

all the Black choirs...

Too broad.

I see you are not racist, so can you say anything good about this style? Or is it of the devil also?

When you say "of the Devil" you probably mean a more narrow field of things than I would if I used that term. For that reason, I do not say "of the Devil." I use the terms: sensual (not to be confused with sensory), of the flesh, or natural. All of these lust against the Spirit of God.

 

[gekko]

oh Aaron - the terms ' of the flesh' 'sensual' and 'natural'

ARE THE SAME AS - ' of the devil '
---

wow. use some logic man.
doh!

 

[Aaron]

The red text in the quote is my words.

Tambourine (percussion).
Psaltery (stringed/percussion--similar to hammered dulcimer)
cymbals (percussion--some were gong-type; others were bells and similar)
trumpet (brass/wind)
shofar (wind)
lyre/harp (stringed--two types, possibly sequentially developed; possibly simultaneously in use--the davidic lyre (kinnor, or harp); and nevel (membrane lyre)--which may have had a percussive element as well as plucked stringed element) You're reaching. The membrane was for amplification, just like the membrane on a banjo.
sistrum (percussion--a rattle of sorts)
menaanim (sometimes includes sistrum, but probably broader term) includes clappers and percussive noisemakers
toph (percussion--a "membranophone" (hide stretched over a frame), or in other words, a drum. Word from Hebrew "tophet," which means "to smite or strike," indicating how it was played).
khalil (wind)--more like an oboe

When folks generally speak of percussion instruments, they aren't speaking of instruments that are used to play tunes like the piano, the harp (one "strikes" the strings with his fingers), celeste, glockenspiel, xylophone, marimba, etc. These are all percussion instruments, but none of them come to mind when one says, "rhythm and percussion." Neither do instruments such as rattles and maracas. So, as I said, percussion (what most people mean when they say "percussion") instruments do not figure prominently in the Hebrew Scriptures or in any of their histories.

Also, listing instruments does not describe their use. I can describe the physical aspects of timpani or kettle drums all I want. Without some other evidence, beyond the science of how to make sound with them, there is no way to know how they were played. For example. Timpani are used in Sprach Zarathustra, the theme to 2001: A Space Odyssey, but they weren't used to define a rhythm.

You still haven't substantiated your assertion that Hebrew music was heavily rhythmic. Is there some ancient description of the music? Some notation newly deciphered? You simply assumed that percussion=rhythm, and interpreted this list of instruments in light of the music you listen to.

 

[rbell]

The red text in the quote is my words.

You still haven't substantiated your assertion that Hebrew music was heavily rhythmic. Is there some ancient description of the music? Some notation newly deciphered? You simply assumed that percussion=rhythm, and interpreted this list of instruments in light of the music you listen to.

My assumptions are based upon:

• the quotes of several scholars (see sources above; Herbert and Mazar both say so, from their studies)
• the number of percussive instruments listed
• the fact that dancing played a major role in celebrative life of Hebrew people. Dancing to music with no rhythm doesn't happen.

Interesting that you separate "percussion" and "rhythm." Despite the fact that it's still an extra-biblical issue, I have no idea how you can make a firm divide.

My goal is not to "win you over" to a style of music you don't like, Aaron. But it is rather to help you understand that you are giving extra-biblical prohibitions where none scripturally exist. And it almost gets humorous watching the granny knot that you have to tie your logic into.

Now. I've responded with archaeological evidence and instruments that Scripture talks about. What sayest thou?

 

[Aaron]

You have to prove that rhythm is leaven. Your whole argument starts from these unproven correlations that are treated as if they are their own authority.

*sigh* Here we go again. Eric, you're throwing the accusation of "holism" around as if it proved something. I wasn't saying that rhythm is leaven. I was wanting to illuminate your fallacious reasoning.

[to all: rhythm is a pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables or beats. No one is arguing against rhythm. It's the kinds of rhythms that are being argued.]

And just as I said, the source is a non-Christian to whom all things are impure. That "pro-African" line won't work, because he obviously is portrayed as a "bad person", and his support of "African beats" is supposed to be the ultimate proof they arebad.

No, he's portrayed as an authority with no motive to hide sensuality or promiscuous from his audience.

It was not empirical evidence, it was a bunch of associations generalized from etymological references, that ignore the spiritual aspect of the issue.

Look up the empiricle.

That to the impure, all things are impure, so what they called the music and used it for does not necessarily make it wrong for everyone else.

You still don't understand the verse, do you?

The Lion Encyclopedia of the Bible,
[SIZE=-1](Lion Publishing, 1978, previously Eerdmans Family Encyclopedia of the Bible, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.)[/SIZE]
p. 191 says "And the music seems to have been strongly rhythmic rather than melodic, although there were set tunes to some of the psalms.". What I see happening, is that people read of "harps and strings" in the scriptures, and think of mellow symphonic music, and thus are reading that into the text. However, it was quite different from that style. This is the music of biblical (mid-eastern) culture, not medieval European chants, as people are assuming. While some make a big deal about the drum's absence in scripture, and even claim it should not be used, there were several other percussion instruments mentioned. Totally ignored is the presence of dancing in the Bible. The Hebrew definitions include "twist", "whirl", and even "writhe" (as in pleasure or pain). It may not have been the sensuous dancing of today, but it completely disproves the whole "flesh/Spirit" argument, which is being read into Gal.5:17 and others, and taught with such supposedly "scriptural" authority. (i.e. that any 'fleshy pleasure' makes it "of the flesh" rather than "of the Spirit", and that music therefore should only lead to sitting stiffly or marching) Like music, it was also used negatively (as in the golden calf incident), but [SIZE=-1]NEVER[/SIZE] afterwards forbidden because of that 'association'. The Encyclopedia continues: "Dancing too, was often apart of people's joyful expression of worship". GOD ACCEPTED IT! (Ps.149:3, 2 Sam.6:14-23) This omission of dancing is just not dealing honestly with the scriptures!

You're not dealing honestly with the Scriptures yourself. No dancing was done in the Temple, where there were Levitical choirs and orchestras. There was no dancing in the synagogues, neither were there musical instruments, their proper place being seen in the Temple accompanying the sacrifices. Neither is there any dancing in the synagogues or in any description of Christian worship. You're failing to see the distinction between worship and national celebrations and the decorum seemly of each one.

You're also making the same error as rbell, that percussion=rhythm.

I've read lots of articles about the music of the Bible. What info they include about style will depend on the author's predisposition. In The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, the author stated that Semitic music was "freely and richly rhythmic," but intellectual honesty in the author compelled him to state that it was not in the characteristic of "regularly recurring meters." That's just another way of saying it had no rhythm, which is what the authority he relied on (Idelsohn) said. In other words, though he wants to call it rhythmical, none of US hearing it would call it such. In other words, its rhythm was nothing that you or rbell would call rhythmic.

One thing all the encyclopedia articles agree on is the difficulty in describing the styles of ancient peoples. The reason it's so difficult, is that music has to be performed, and the style in which it is performed entirely depends upon the character of the one performing it.

 

[Aaron]

oh Aaron - the terms ' of the flesh' 'sensual' and 'natural'

ARE THE SAME AS - ' of the devil '
---

wow. use some logic man.
doh!

Most people do not make that connection, so I don't use that term. It just confuses the matter. Now go home, little boy, and let the men talk.

 

[rbell]

Most people do not make that connection, so I don't use that term. It just confuses the matter. Now go home, little boy, and let the men talk.

now that's classy. Why is it that those kinds of responses seem to come from you on every thread you respond to?

Aaron, impart your vast knowledge upon us. Since "percussion" and "rhythm" are different, and since certain kinds of "rhythms" are evil, enlighten us...

Exactly when does a "rhythm" become evil? What kind of "rhythm" is an evil one?

By the way, if you get bored, go back and answer post #68. Ya'll have enjoyed ignoring my very pertinent questions.

 

[tinytim]

Aaron that was uncalled for...

 

[Aaron]

My assumptions are based upon:

the quotes of several scholars (see sources above; Herbert and Mazar both say so, from their studies)

See my response to Eric.

the number of percussive instruments listed

Already dealt with that. You would do well to pay attention.

the fact that dancing played a major role in celebrative life of Hebrew people. Dancing to music with no rhythm doesn't happen.

People can dance to waltzes and jigs, too, but that doesn't mean they're heavily rhythmic. You're employing a common tactic used by your side. All music is rhthmic in the sense that it has a regular metre, but not all music has a backbeat defined by bass and drums. And not all music stresses the same beats. That's not the argument. You said that ancient Hebrew music was "very heavily" rhythmic. That all music is rhthmic doesn't support that.

It's good that you look at dancing. Now, what KIND of dancing was it? That is good evidence for the KIND of rhythm it was.

Interesting that you separate "percussion" and "rhythm."

Anyone who knows music will. There are tuned and untuned percussion instruments. Many percussion instruments are designed for playing melodies, not making a beat. The psaltery was one (though most authorities agree it was played with the fingers, not with hammers) and also the nevel. But you wanted us to think of them as something to lay down a beat with.

Despite the fact that it's still an extra-biblical issue, I have no idea how you can make a firm divide.

You should study music some, and you will see.

My goal is not to "win you over" to a style of music you don't like, Aaron.

My goal is to show that what you post as evidence is really a cleverly (or not so clever, really) devised fable.

But it is rather to help you understand that you are giving extra-biblical prohibitions where none scripturally exist.

Actually, the Scriptures are replete with admonitions that apply directly to musical styles. Once you understand that music is not a machine, but a behavior and a manner of interaction, you will see that too.

Now, to the question you've been avoiding. Is there any musical style that you would classify as excessive or riotous?

 

[Aaron]

Post 68 is AV1611jim's post.

 

[rbell]

Is there any musical style that you would classify as excessive or riotous?

There are musical acts that I would classify as such. This is based on their content, not form.

I repeat the question, now, that you cannot answer and avoid:
What kind of "rhythm" is an evil one?

If I gave you 100 songs, could you weed out the satanic ones? And scripturally justify how you weeded out what you did...and not in any way be using personal tastes and preference?

I eagerly await your non-reply

 

[Aaron]

There are musical acts that I would classify as such. This is based on their content, not form.

What do you mean their content, not form?

I repeat the question, now, that you cannot answer and avoid:
What kind of "rhythm" is an evil one?

And I gave you a way to judge rhythm. Your question was asked and answered.