Archives For rajesh

In their thinking about human sinfulness, many believers may often be missing a key distinction that Scripture repeatedly makes in both Testaments between two major categories of sins:

1. Samuel the prophet rebuked King Saul for his disobedience with instruction that distinguished between the sin of witchcraft/divination and the sin of idolatry:

KJV 1Sa 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

NAS 1Sa 15:23 “For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, He has also rejected you from being king.”

2. The author of Second Chronicles relates the horrific sinfulness of king Manasseh by speaking of his idolatry (2 Chron. 33:3-5 and 33:7) in distinction from his involvement with occult practices (2 Chron. 33:6):

KJV 2Ch 33:3 For he built again the high places which Hezekiah his father had broken down, and he reared up altars for Baalim, and made groves, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served them.

NAS 2Ch 33:3 For he rebuilt the high places which Hezekiah his father had broken down; he also erected altars for the Baals and made Asherim, and worshiped all the host of heaven and served them.

KJV 2Ch 33:4 Also he built altars in the house of the LORD, whereof the LORD had said, In Jerusalem shall my name be for ever.

NAS 2Ch 33:4 And he built altars in the house of the LORD of which the LORD had said, “My name shall be in Jerusalem forever.”

KJV 2Ch 33:5 And he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the LORD.

NAS 2Ch 33:5 For he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the LORD.

KJV 2Ch 33:6 And he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.

NAS 2Ch 33:6 And he made his sons pass through the fire in the valley of Ben-hinnom; and he practiced witchcraft, used divination, practiced sorcery, and dealt with mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking Him to anger.

KJV 2Ch 33:7 And he set a carved image, the idol which he had made, in the house of God, of which God had said to David and to Solomon his son, In this house, and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen before all the tribes of Israel, will I put my name for ever:

NAS 2Ch 33:7 Then he put the carved image of the idol which he had made in the house of God, of which God had said to David and to Solomon his son, “In this house and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen from all the tribes of Israel, I will put My name forever;

3. When Paul the Apostle lists various works of the flesh, he distinguishes between idolatry (Gal. 5:20) and witchcraft/sorcery (Gal. 5:20):

KJV Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

NAS Gal 5:19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,

KJV Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

NAS Gal 5:20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,

4. The apostle John likewise distinguishes the worship of demons and idolatry (Rev. 9:20) from sorceries (Rev. 9:21):

KJV Rev 9:20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

NAS Rev 9:20 And the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold and of silver and of brass and of stone and of wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk;

KJV Rev 9:21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

NAS Rev 9:21 and they did not repent of their murders nor of their sorceries nor of their immorality nor of their thefts.

These four passages that are from both Testaments (as well as other passages) teach us plainly that we must not think of idolatry and occult practices as if they were basically the same sin. In our consideration, therefore, of cultural issues that are hotly debated among believers, such as the propriety of using rock music for Christian worship, we must be careful not to lump idolatry and the occult together.

This distinction is vital to keep in mind because the disputed teaching in passages that speak about idolatry, such as 1 Corinthians 8-11, does not apply to instances of cultural issues that involve contact with the occult. Those who argue that eating meat offered to idols is no problem for Christians when that meat is eaten outside of the context of actual idol worship cannot legitimately extend that teaching to say that Christian use of things associated with occult practices are similarly not a problem for believers outside their use in actual occult practices.

Scripture categorically forbids believers from having any contact with the occult and its practitioners. None of the passages typically cited in discussions of Christian liberty apply to Christian contact with the occult and things associated with the occult, and believers must shun all such contact.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In his very popular work Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Dr. Wayne Grudem devotes a chapter to a treatment of “The Gospel Call and Effective Calling.” In this chapter, he writes, “In human preaching of the gospel, three important elements must be included” (694). He says that these elements are the following:

I. Explanation of the Facts Concerning Salvation

II. Invitation to Respond to Christ Personally in Repentance and Faith

III. A Promise of Forgiveness and Eternal Life

These headings cover many essential aspects of giving the gospel to sinners, but unbelievably and inexplicably, Dr. Grudem does not say anything anywhere directly about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in this treatment of the subject, “The Gospel Call and Effective Calling”! How is it possible that a renowned biblical scholar like Dr. Grudem does not say that testifying to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is an essential fact that must be explained concerning salvation!

I was shocked when I first saw this omission years ago and could not believe what I was reading. I am still amazed that this lacking treatment of the gospel was published and has not been addressed for all the years that the work has been available. How could those who have proofed this work not have noticed the lack of any mention of the Resurrection in the chapter that explains what the Gospel call is?

Apparently, Dr. Grudem and others have thought that in giving the gospel, it is enough to say that Jesus Christ “is a Savior who is now alive in heaven” and who is Himself appealing to the sinner to come to Him.1 The Gospels2 and the apostolic preaching of the gospel throughout the book of Acts,3 however, show that this is not a sufficient testimony to the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

Leaving it to sinners to infer the truth of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is not how we should present the gospel to them.4 Explicit, detailed, and emphatic testimony to the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the very essence of biblical gospel preaching!

In his own thinking and practice, every reader of this leading theological work needs to correct this omission in Dr. Grudem’s teaching concerning the gospel call. Those who are responsible for training future leaders must take care to address this matter with those that they train for gospel ministry who have encountered this teaching by Dr. Grudem.


1 After quoting Jesus’ invitation to sinners that is recorded in Matthew 11:28-30, Dr. Grudem writes in this regard,

It is important to make clear that these are not just words spoken a long time ago by a religious leader in the past. Every non-Christian hearing these words should be encouraged to think of them as words that Jesus Christ is even now, at this very moment, speaking to him or to her individually. Jesus Christ is a Savior, who is now alive in heaven, and each non-Christian should think of Jesus as speaking directly to him or her (694).

2 Every Gospel ends with extensive testimony to the bodily resurrection and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ (Matt. 28; Mk. 16; Luke 24; John 20-21).

3 Explicit mention of the resurrection is part of the climactic content of key evangelistic messages that are recorded in the book of Acts (Acts 2:31-32; 10:40-41; 13:30-37; 17:30-31).

4 Paul told the Corinthians that the gospel that he preached to them was the message that included testimony that Christ “rose again the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:4). He did not relate that he had testified to them that Jesus was alive—he had borne witness that God raised Jesus from the dead (1 Cor. 15:15).

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

You often hear people say that no one is any better than anyone else is. A statement by Samuel the prophet that explicitly compares two key people does not support this common statement:

KJV 1Sa 15:28 And Samuel said unto him, The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.

NAU 1Sa 15:28 So Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to your neighbor, who is better than you.

NET 1Sa 15:28 Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you this day and has given it to one of your colleagues who is better than you!

NIV 1Sa 15:28 Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to one of your neighbors– to one better than you.

NKJ 1Sa 15:28 So Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today, and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you.

ESV 1Sa 15:28 And Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you this day and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you.

CSB 1Sa 15:28 Samuel said to him, “The LORD has torn the kingship of Israel away from you today and has given it to your neighbor who is better than you.

As the biblical data above shows, every one of these major translations reads the same—God said that David was better than Saul was! Based on this explicit biblical teaching, we must adjust what we say in this regard to account for what God has revealed to us in this passage.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Although opportunities to jump into discussions on social media abound, how should we decide whether we should enter a particular discussion that we come across that is of interest to us? Proverbs 26:17 provides some wise counsel that we would do well to consider carefully before entering into an online discussion.

Divine Advice to Those Who Pass By a Situation involving Strife

Through teaching that God inspired King Solomon to give, God warns those who pass by certain situations to avoid unnecessary involvement:

Pro 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

Charles Bridges aptly explains this important teaching:

Even with Christian intentions many of us are too fond of meddling with strife not belonging to us. We constitute ourselves too readily judges of our neighbour’s conduct. Neutrality is often the plain dictate of prudence. Un-called for interference seldom avails much with the contending parties; while the well-meaning mediator involves himself in the strife to his own mischief.1

Jay Adams concurs:

In verses 17 through 19 you meet two kinds of troublemakers. The first is the one who loves quarreling so much that he will even become involved in disputes that have nothing to do with him. To do so is like grabbing a dog by the ears (presumably not Fido, but someone else’s dog who is anything but friendly). He will get a reaction: often a hostile, possibly harmful one. He brings trouble on himself.2

Heeding God’s warning given in Proverbs 26:17 will save us from much unnecessary trouble in our lives.

Application to Discussions on Social Media

God does not want us to meddle unnecessarily in strife that does not belong to us. When we encounter discussions on social media on subjects that interest us, we must take care not to jump in simply because the discussion is about something that we have an opinion about that we want to share.

Rather, we must gauge carefully the nature of the interaction that is already taking place between those who are discussing the subject. Especially if the discussion is of a heated nature and concerns something that does not have some direct pertinence to us, we often would do well to be slow to get involved.

If we know one or more of the combating parties personally, often a better approach is to message those people privately and share our thoughts with them that way. I have used this approach a number of times and commend it to you as a way for you to avoid unnecessarily entangling yourself in an online discussion in a way that results in your being attacked for what you say.


1 Proverbs, Geneva Series of Commentaries, 494; words in bold are in italics in the original

2 Proverbs, The Christian Counselor’s Commentary, 200; words in bold are bold in the original

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Mrs. Esther Arnold from my church has written an excellent new song from Psalm 40. The music and an audio of my church singing the song are available here under the heading “Savoring Psalm 40.”

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Many evangelicals as well as other Christians use Romans 14:1-15:13 frequently to challenge the views of Christians who hold conservative music positions. Typically, these believers who hold non-conservative music positions regard themselves as the strong believers of this passage and view those with conservative positions as the weak believers spoken of here.

To apply Romans 14:1-15:13 properly to any disputed area of Christian belief and practice requires thorough attention both to the larger context of the book of Romans and to the nature of the issues under consideration in this passage. Through giving such attention to this passage, we are able to assess correctly the validity of the common contention that those with conservative music positions are the weak believers of this passage.

In Part I of this series, I consider how putting Romans 14:1-15:13 in its larger context of the book of Romans is necessary for determining its proper application to the debates about Christian music. In Part II of this series, I intend to examine how the nature of the issues under consideration in Romans 14:1-15:13 itself bears upon its application to the debates about Christian music.

Romans 14:1-15:13 in Light of Its Larger Context of the Book of Romans

God did not give Romans 14:1-15:13 as a self-contained revelation of His mind about how to handle the issues that Christians debate; He gave this passage as part of the whole book of Romans. We can only rightly understand and apply this passage, therefore, when we properly relate it to other teaching by Paul in the book of Romans that has direct bearing on what sort of issues are in view in this passage.

The following six points bring out various aspects of Pauline teaching in the book of Romans that directly relate to the debates about Christian music:

1. Inventors of Evil Things — Paul taught that reprobate humans are “inventors of evil things” (Rom. 1:30). I have previously discussed (in this post) the relevance of this statement for the debates about Christian music. Concerning what issues Romans 14:1-15:13 pertains to, we can be certain that the teaching of this passage does not apply to issues concerning musical styles that evil humans have originated as inventors of evil.

2. The Whole Creation is in Bondage to Corruption — Paul testifies that the entire universe is under the bondage of corruption:

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, 21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

To support their music positions, many Christian proponents of non-conservative music positions espouse views that in effect exempt instrumental music from the effects of the Fall of man. Scripture, however, provides no basis for holding that the bondage of the whole creation to corruption has not affected human creation of and use of instrumental musical styles.

3. Conformity to the World — Paul commands believers not to be “conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2). Many of those who hold non-conservative music positions in effect argue that this teaching does not apply to the instrumental musical styles created by humans who oppose God because they hold that all musical styles are inherently good and fit for human use by virtue of their being divinely created. Not only is there no Scripture to support such a view about the necessary inherent fitness of all musical styles, but also Scripture provides revelation that refutes the validity of such an assertion.

4. Casting off the Works of Darkness — Paul commands believers to “cast off the works of darkness” (Rom. 13:12). Scripture teaches that Satan is the prince who is energizing and ruling over the darkness of this evil world (Eph. 2:2; Col. 1:13).

Many rock musicians have testified to the controlling and originating role of demons in the production of their music. We can be certain that Paul never intended Romans 14:1-15:13 to be applied to things and practices that entail humans engaging in such demonically sourced works of darkness.

5. Turning from Dissolute Living — Paul enjoins believers not to live dissolute lifestyles:

Rom 13:13 Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.

Those who have originated rock music are infamous for their evil lifestyles, and they have testified that they created this music with the intent of promoting such wicked lifestyles. We can be certain that Romans 14:1-15:13 does not apply to music and other things that are so closely associated in these ways to people who live and promote such dissolute lifestyles.

6. Making No Provision for the Lusts of the Flesh — Paul directs believers not to make any provision for the flesh to fulfill its lusts (Rom. 13:14). Because testimony directly from rock musicians abounds that they created their music for the purpose of influencing people to fulfill various lusts of the flesh, we can confidently hold that Romans 14:1-15:13 does not apply to such music that was specifically created to have these effects on people.

Conclusion

An examination of the larger context of Romans 14:1-15:13 within the book of Romans shows that Paul provides teaching in at least six passages that addresses considerations that show that issues that involve these considerations are issues to which Romans 14:1-15:13 does not apply. Because all six of these passages have direct bearing on certain aspects of key issues involved in the debates about Christian music, believers who hold conservative music positions because they heed the application of these passages to these issues are not the weak believers spoken of in Romans 14:1-15:13.


See my post Resources That Provide Answers to Key Issues Concerning CCM for much more biblical information about issues concerning what music God accepts in corporate worship.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

The apostle Paul concludes Romans 1 with a lengthy list that relates various sinful aspects of the evil lifestyles of humans who have depraved minds because of God’s judgment upon them:

Rom 1:28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

In the midst of the numerous specific vices that Paul names here, he writes that these people are “inventors of evil things” (Rom. 1:30). This statement has great importance for our understanding of how we are to assess certain musical styles, as can be seen by the following observations that are based upon it in various ways:

1. Paul says that these evil people invent evil things. Whatever things Paul has in mind here, therefore, cannot be said in any sense to be things that are created by God.

Scripture provides no evidence for saying that rock music was created by God, and it provides key teaching about human creative activity with things that were created by God that shows that no product of such human creative activity must necessarily be something that is fit for human use (see this post). Saying, therefore, that Romans 1:30 does not apply to rock music because rock music was created by God is an invalid argument against applying Romans 1:30 to our assessment of rock music.

2. Paul does not bother to specify at all what these evil things are that these evil people invent. Because he does not do so, we learn that there are humanly created evil aspects of these people’s lives that Paul had in mind that he did not believe he had to list out for his readers.Without his specifying what these evil inventions were, Paul expected his readers to know what these evil things were that these evil humans had invented.

Furthermore, his not specifying these evil aspects of the lives of these reprobate humans shows that this is another instance (cf. “and such like” [Gal. 5:21]) when Paul communicates to his readers that Scripture does not provide an exhaustive listing of human sinful activities. This very important observation shows that Scripture does not have to say explicitly that some human practice or invention is sinful for us to be able to say legitimately that it is unfit for human use.

The fact that Scripture does not say anything directly about rock music does not mean that we cannot say that we should reject it. Romans 1:30 and other passages provide believers with ample justification to reject rock music categorically.

3. When evil human beings who reject the knowledge of God and manifest in their lives many of the evils listed here specifically say that they have invented things to promote many of the very evils that are listed here, believers must heed what they say and not have anything to do with such evil things that these people have invented. Because many of the evil people who originated rock music and popularized it have testified directly of their evil intent in what they were doing, God-fearing Christians should reject rock music categorically as an evil invention of those who are “inventors of evil things.”

4. Careful Christians who reject rock music and all other styles of music derived from it based on the application of Romans 1:30 (and its surrounding context) to such testimonies do not have to be able to explain (with specific explanations about the music itself) why these styles are evil to know that they are evil. Scripture never places such a burden on believers, and it is sufficient to make such assessments based on the authority of the many statements by God that repeatedly tell believers not to fashion themselves according to the practices of the wicked (for example, Ps. 1:1; Rom. 12:1-2).

5. Because Paul gave this revelation about reprobate humans who are inventors of evil things in the same book that he gives his teaching about certain things that believers disagree upon (Rom. 14:1-15:3), we can be certain that Paul’s teaching about those questionable things does not apply to Christian use of any of the evil things invented by the evil people that he speaks of in Romans 1:30. Romans 14:1-15:13, therefore, does not justify Christian use of rock music and other styles based on rock music simply because believers disagree about the propriety of doing so.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

After God made Adam, He put him in the Garden of Eden “to dress and to keep it” (Gen. 2:15). Although Scripture does not provide any more information about these activities, we can be sure that Adam’s work involved the use of various tools to take care of the garden that God had planted (Gen. 2:8).1

Genesis 3 confirms this inference by informing us that Adam and Eve engaged in some skilled activity that involved their using an unspecified tool for fabricating for a specific purpose something that had never existed before:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

A close consideration of this revelation about their first actions after they had fallen shows that it has direct applicability to some key issues pertaining to the debate about the propriety of Christian use of rock music.

Who Made These Fig Leaf Aprons?

God made the fig tree (or trees) that the leaves came from (Gen. 2:8-9), but the Spirit tells us that Adam and Eve took the fig leaves, sewed them together, and made aprons for themselves (Gen 3:7). Plainly, Scripture is saying that Adam and Eve, and not God, made these aprons.

Furthermore, the text does not say in any way that God directed them to make these aprons. In fact, we have no basis for holding that they had ever received any prior revelation concerning taking fig leaves and crafting aprons from them.

What Was Involved in Making These Aprons?

To make these aprons, Adam and Eve used their God-given creative abilities to invent an entirely new use of the leaves from the good fig tree that God made. In doing so, they in addition had either to invent or to put to a new use some kind of tool to sew them together and to do something similar about the thread or other material that they used to sew the fig leaves together.

What Was God’s Assessment of Their Making the Aprons?

After they had made the aprons (Gen. 3:7), Adam and Eve hid themselves from God (Gen. 3:8). God then dealt with them about their sinful eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3:9-24).

After He had dealt with them about this sin, He made coats of skins and clothed Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:21). His doing so shows that He deemed the aprons that they had invented unfit for accomplishing the purpose for which they had made them.

Application to Issues Concerning the Propriety of Christian Use of Rock Music

The first recorded instance of human creative activity involved taking good preexisting materials that God had created and producing an entirely new entity that had never existed before. Even though everything that Adam and Eve used to make these fig leaf aprons was a good thing that God created, the resulting product was not fit for use for the purpose for which they made it.

The application of this revelation to issues concerning the propriety of Christian use of rock music becomes clear through an analysis of how many Christian proponents of the use of rock music argue for their position. As we consider their arguments, we must keep in mind vital points of correspondence between what they say and what we have discovered through our comparative examination of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21.

Some proponents of Christian use of rock music argue that instrumental rock music necessarily is inherently fit for human use because they hold that God created all music. Not only does the Bible provide no support for this view, but also it provides explicit revelation that points to fallen humans, and not God, as the originators of human musical styles (Gen. 4:21; see this post for an explanation of this key point).

In response to this biblical data, proponents of Christian use of rock music argue that all human musical styles are still good because God created as good all the elements of music that fallen humans have combined to form all the musical styles that they have originated. Because all the elements were created as good, they hold that all combinations of those elements must also necessarily be good and fit for human use.

Our analysis of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21, however, has shown that Scripture presents a key instance when human creative activity involving the combining of good things that God created did not result in a product that was suitable for the purpose for which it was made. Because Scripture provides us with this explicit evidence, we know that any argument that insists that every way of combining good musical elements that God has created necessarily must result in a musical style that is fit for human use is false.

Supporters of rock music, therefore, cannot legitimately argue that rock music necessarily is inherently fit for human use because it merely combines good musical elements that God created. No such necessity for the fitness of such a combination exists and making such an argument is refuted by the direct implications of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21.2

Conclusion

Biblical revelation about the unsuitability of the fig leaf aprons that Adam and Eve invented shows that Christians who use rock music cannot justify their doing so by arguing that rock music is necessarily a fit-for-human-use musical style because it was originated by combining good musical elements that God created. Proving that rock music is a musical style that is fit for human use requires more than asserting that it is merely a combination of good musical elements.


1 We are unable to know definitively where Adam got these tools and how he learned to use them. It is possible that he invented them.

2 This examination of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21 does not prove that rock music is unfit for human use. It only proves that an argument for the necessity of the fitness of rock music for human use based on its being a combination of good elements is invalid.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Today is the 70th day of 2015. So far, I have read 357 chapters of the Bible this year:

OT – 166 (Job 1-42; Gen. 1-50; Psa. 1-50; Proverbs 1-12; 1 Sam. 1-12)

NT- 191 (Matt. 1 — 2 Cor. 13; Gal. 1-6; 1 Tim. 1–2 Tim. 4; James 1-5; 1 Pet. 1– 2 Pet. 3)

I’m very thankful to have had the desire and opportunity to read an average of more than 5 chapters a day so far in 2015, praise God!

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Whether or not all musical styles are inherently good and inherently fit for use in divine worship is a key point of dispute among believers concerning CCM. Because Genesis 4:21 is the earliest biblical revelation about humans playing musical instruments, examining its relevance to the CCM debate is vital.

In my experience, however, Genesis 4:21 has not been considered thoroughly by most people on either side of the CCM debate. I have previously written several articles that treat various aspects of what Genesis 4:21 reveals, especially in relation to certain issues concerning CCM.1

This post brings out yet another facet of its teaching about music that applies to the CCM debate in a way that I have not previously discussed. To understand the application of this facet of Genesis 4:21 to the CCM debate, we have to examine it in relation to its surrounding context that includes many biblical references to divine creative activity and some other references to human creative activity.

References to God as the Creator of All Things in Genesis 1-11

Through at least 30 direct references to divine creative activity2 in Genesis 1-11,3 God indisputably asserts at the beginning of our canonical arrangement of Scripture that He is the Creator of all created things. It is worth noting also that all of these references speak of God’s creating things that man did not play any role in their creation (for example, light, the expanse, and the animals).

Furthermore, it is also noteworthy that only one of these 30 references speaks of God’s making something that humans could conceivably even have made or played a role in its making: “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them” (Gen. 3:21). Based on this data, we know that the Spirit is purposely directing to our attention numerous statements about distinctively divine creative activity in these chapters.

References to Humans as the Makers of Certain Things in Genesis 1-11

Only after we have read 24 statements about what God has created do we encounter the first statement about something that man made:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

This earliest reference to human creative activity speaks of humans taking something that they did not make (the fig leaves) and fashioning something else out of it (aprons; for a fuller explanation of the vital importance of this text for issues concerning the CCM debate, see this post).

Genesis 4 provides the next information that we have about human creative activity (Gen. 4:17, 20, 21, 22). Among those statements is the earliest statement that we have about human musical activity:

Gen 4:21 And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.

We must not fail to note that the first information that the Spirit gives to us about human musical activity directly concerns not their singing but their playing musical instruments. Moreover, the Spirit does not frame His presentation of this revelation in such a way as to highlight God’s working in these people to produce and do what they did.

Instead, the Spirit says to us that Jubal was “the father” of all those who were playing these instruments. By framing this statement in that way, the Spirit is clearly emphasizing that Jubal was either the inventor of these instruments or the one who pioneered playing them in some way or both.

Regardless of which way we understand this statement, it is clearly not presenting God as the One who created the style or styles in which Jubal and the others mentioned here played these instruments. Rather, and in sharp contrast to the surrounding profound emphasis on divine creation, the Spirit is highlighting that fallen humans created these musical styles.

Application to the CCM Debate

Christian supporters of the use of rock music and CCM rely heavily on an argument based on God as the Creator of all musical styles to support their views. They argue that God is the Creator of all musical styles, and therefore they are all inherently good and inherently fit for use in divine worship.4

Scripture, however, not only does not say anything about God as the One who created all musical styles but also it directly emphasizes the opposite by saying that fallen humans originated the musical styles that are in view in the earliest biblical revelation about humans playing musical instruments. For this reason, discussions of rock music and CCM that defend Christian use of these types of music by appealing to God’s creating them as inherently good and therefore necessarily fit for divine worship are seriously flawed because they do not account properly for how the Bible in Genesis 4:21 frames its first presentation of human musical activity.

Conclusion

When believers who hold to the propriety of Christian use of rock music and CCM seek to defend their views, they must not use an illegitimate argument from the supposed divine creation of these styles to justify their views. To defend their views properly, they must show from the Bible why they believe that these styles are fit for Christian use in spite of biblical evidence that shows that not even all the animals that God originally created as good were acceptable for offering to Him in worship even by the time of the Flood.


1 See these previous posts for more information.

2 Genesis 1:1, 6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31; 2:2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 18, 19, 22; 3:3, 21; 5:1, 2; 6:6, 7; 7:4.

3 Genesis 1-11 is a natural place to limit our examination because these chapters naturally go together in providing us with information about early human history.

4 See my post Are All Musical Styles Inherently Moral? for a biblical treatment of evidence from Genesis that disproves the view that all musical styles are inherently moral.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.