You've GOT to watch this - please

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)

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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:

 

then post 'em.

 

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

 

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

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.

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.

Too broad.

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.

 

The red text in the quote is my words.

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.

 

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?

 

*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.]

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

Look up the empiricle.

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

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.

 

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.

 

Aaron that was uncalled for...

 

See my response to Eric.

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

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.

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.

You should study music some, and you will see.

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

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?

 

Post 68 is AV1611jim's post.

 

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

 

What do you mean their content, not form?

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