CCM | A People for His Name

What the Sufficiency of Scripture Does Not Mean Concerning the CCM Debate

May 20, 2013

Second Timothy 3:15-17 definitively asserts the sufficiency of Scripture. Applying that teaching to the CCM debate, some argue that there must be a direct reference to things such as specific music styles in order for us to speak definitively about the propriety of their use in Christian worship.

Several passages show us that this is a mistaken approach to the CCM debate:

1. Psalm 19 teaches us that God is continuously infallibly communicating moral truth to all people without the use of any words and regardless of whether they ever hear any Scripture or not. Especially in connection with other teaching in the Psalms, God’s doing this has important implications for the CCM debate (see Natural Revelation, Music Related to God’s Providence, . . .).

2. Titus 1 unequivocally supports believers’ using statements by expert secular authorities to confirm their own biblically based assessments of moral issues in the lives of people (see Titus 1 and the CCM Debate). On the authority of Titus 1 (and other Scripture), believers are justified in arguing against the use of CCM by citing secular authorities who confirm their own negative assessments of it.

3. Mark 6 and Matthew 14 show us that Scripture can communicate authoritatively that an activity can be sensual by only mentioning the activity itself in a given context and without having to give any details about the activity. This observation validates the understanding that certain Scriptural statements about music need not be explicit or detailed in order to teach us that music can be sensual (see Will the Sensuality of CCM in Your Church . . .).

4. First Corinthians 11 is another passage that helps us to know what the sufficiency of Scripture does not mean for the CCM debate. Although its teaching and relevance are related to those of Psalm 19, this passage has unique aspects that warrant treating it separately.

Even “Nature” Taught the Corinthians That Something Was Shameful

Paul wrote to believers in Corinth to instruct them concerning the use of head coverings while they were praying or prophesying (1 Cor. 11:1-16). To support his argumentation for his teaching about that practice, he cited the teaching that even “nature” provided them:

1Co 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

¹⁴ Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

¹⁵ But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Although there are many debates about various aspects of this passage, it is indisputable that Paul held that a source other than Scripture was teaching the Corinthians infallibly that something was shameful. Paul thus believed and taught that Scripture was not the only source of authoritative information that informed believers about the moral nature of certain things.

The Specificity of Nature’s Moral Teaching to the Corinthians is Noteworthy

Paul declared that “nature” was teaching the Corinthians that if a man was having long hair, it was a shame to him (1 Cor. 11:14). A non-biblical source of information, therefore, was teaching them authoritatively about the moral character of a specific aspect of the hair of a man.

Moreover, we must note that because God made humans to have hair on their heads, hair itself is not amoral—it is morally good. Yet, a non-biblical authority was instructing the Corinthians that long hair was a shame to a man.

Does “Nature” Teach Us about the Moral Value of Music?

Before we can answer the question of whether “nature” teaches us anything about the moral value of music, we should consider at least briefly what “nature” means in this passage. Some hold that it means what is observable in the natural world that God created. Some believe that it refers to intrinsic moral perspectives that God has put within humans. Some seem to equate “nature” in this passage with culture.

Views that combine these ideas in various ways probably also exist. Regardless of what the word “nature” means here, it is clear that Paul was teaching that something other than Scripture was teaching the Corinthians that something would be shameful concerning something that in and of itself was actually moral.

For an example of how “nature” teaches us about the moral value of music, listen to the following audio with your eyes closed and try to detect impartially whether what is sung is sensual music or not: Nature’s Teaching About Music. Were you not able to know that this music was sensual in spite of there not being any sensual words sung by the singer?

As this example plainly shows, a believer does not need to have Scriptural teaching about what makes music sensual in order to know that this song was sensual. The sufficiency of Scripture does not mean that Scripture must provide an explanation of what comprises music that is sensual.

In CCM, Interpretation, Music, Theology

Resources That Provide Answers to Key Issues Concerning CCM

May 16, 2013

Are you looking for help in finding answers to key issues concerning CCM? I commend these resources to you to that end and pray that God will give you the help that you are seeking (click on the links below to read the full article that explains each point)

1. Scripture itself teaches that Scripture is not the only source for authoritative information for knowing the moral character of some things

—What the sufficiency of Scripture does not mean for the CCM debate

2. A sound theology of music must account for all that the Bible reveals about music

—First Samuel 16:14-23 teaches us several key truths about music that are lacking in the theology of music of many believers today

—A fully biblical theology of sound teaches us that we should reject certain music

—God does pay attention to the instrumental music used to worship Him!

—Elisha’s calling for a minstrel to play for him, and God’s response to that music also teaches about divine attentiveness to instrumental music

3. Music without words is not amoral nor is it inherently moral

—David’s instrumental music was not amoral.

—Some believe in the amorality of music because they have mishandled the accounts of David’s music ministry to Saul.

—Natural revelation and music related to God’s providence teach us that music without words is not amoral.

—An examination of some truths in chemistry illumines the debate about the morality of music without words.

—Sound reasoning shows that we must reject the view that music without words is inherently amoral.

—A comparison between photography and music shows that it is wrong to say that music without words cannot be inherently evil.

—A careful analysis of Daniel 3 supports holding that instrumental music is not inherently moral even though God created music.

—An examination of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21 shows that it is illegitimate to say that rock music necessarily is inherently fit for human use because it is merely a combination of good musical elements that God made.

—Genesis 4:21 teaches us that it is unbiblical to assert that God created all musical styles and that supporting CCM on that basis is invalid.

—Biblical revelation about worship in Genesis 8 shows that an argument from Creation that argues that all music is necessarily inherently fit for use in divine worship is invalid.

4. Scripture can teach us that something is immoral because of its sensuality without having to say so explicitly and without having to give any details about it

—Scripture never explicitly says that dancing can be sensual, but the account of Herod and Herodias’ daughter’s dancing clearly teaches us that it can be—without saying anything directly about the dancing and without giving any details about the dancing.

—Scripture teaches us that it is not necessary for those who reject CCM/CWM to define these terms and explain in detail exactly what these terms signify and why such music is unacceptable

5. Scripture is not silent about musical styles that are unacceptable to God

—A sound handling of Genesis 4-6 shows that it is not true that all musical styles are inherently moral

—Several passages help show why “cultural racism” is not a major cause of Christian opposition to “holy hip-hop”

—Scriptural teaching about the songs of fools, drunkards, and harlots shows that there are musical styles that are inherently unacceptable to God.

—How 1 Cor. 10:23 teaches that not all musical styles are fit for use in worship

—Five Key Requirements for Acceptable Kinds of Instrumental Music Used in Corporate Worship

6. Clear biblical teaching directs us to reject CCM

—A biblical approach to music for believers must be based on the Psalms. They teach us that the Psalmists would reject CCM.

—Amos 6 provides Scriptural information that teaches us to reject CCM.

—An application of Romans 14 to the testimony of someone who was spiritually harmed by exposure to CCM in the church shows that we should reject CCM.

—Vital biblical considerations and other evidence warns us to beware endangering others and ourselves through music.

7. It is biblical to use secular sources to confirm one’s assessment that CCM is unfit for Christians

—Paul’s use of secular sources in Titus 1 to confirm his assessment of the Cretans shows that it is biblical to use secular sources to confirm our biblically based view that CCM is not fit for believers.

—Christians should heed what secular musicians and music experts say about the morality of music

—Secular testimonies about fallen spirits as the source of ungodly music are not inherently unreliable

—Using secular testimonies about demonic influence on human musicians is legitimate

8. Reliable secular sources confirm that CCM is unfit for Christians

—A brief video of a secular rock icon who advised a minister shows that CCM is not fit for Christian ministry.

9. Music can be sensual without having any sensual lyrics

—Listening to an audio of a song that has no sensual lyrics but is still clearly sensual proves that music can be sensual without having any sensual lyrics

10. My testimony concerning music that is fit for believers

—God moved me from heavy metal, soft rock, and pop to psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.

11. Other resources concerning CCM

—Shelly Hamilton has written an excellent book that provides solid answers for dealing with many of the key issues concerning CCM.

—This interesting parable should provoke your thinking concerning issues related to CCM.

—God warns us about sensual worship and sensual music

— Scriptural revelation about sensual music warns us against using contemporary worship to evangelize people

— Even if David used a harp that an ungodly man invented, his doing so does not justify CCM

— Why this “thought experiment” does not justify “Christian rock” and “Christian rap”

— First Timothy 4:4-5 and Romans 14:14 do not refute what Shai Linne says they do

—Second Kings 4:38-41 provides revelation that biblically answers one of the most common arguments used today to justify CCM

—The testimony about a “new song” in Psalm 40 does not justify using CCM to evangelize lost people

—Using passages about meat offered to idols to support the use of disputed musical styles is a serious misstep

—Demonically assigned musical meanings to rock music is another key issue to consider

—Some CCM Defenders or the Glorified Christ: Choose Carefully Whom You Will Follow!

12. The Golden Calf incident (GCI) is foundational for understanding key issues concerning CCM. This series of articles will treat the incident thoroughly from many viewpoints to explain why believers should not use CCM. To profit fully from this series, you should read the articles in order.

A. Toward Fully Understanding the Golden Calf Incident

B. More Insights about the Golden Calf Incident

C. Leadership Failure and the Golden Calf Incident

D. Religious Syncretism and the Golden Calf Incident

E. The NT Key to a Fuller Understanding of the Golden Calf Incident

F. How The Golden Calf Passages Illumine the CCM Debate: Part I

G. Is Exodus 32 a Record of Singing and Dancing without Musical Instruments

H. Is Exodus 32 a Record of an Event Featuring the Sound of Ungodly Singing

I. Poll Results and Analysis: Is Exodus 32:17-18 Divine Revelation about Worship Music?

J. What Does Ungodly Worship Music Sound Like?

(I anticipate having several more articles in this series, including an article that specifically addresses issues concerning CCM.)

In CCM, Music

Will The Sensuality of CCM in Your Church Worsen the Wickedness of Many Herod-Like People in Your Church?

May 11, 2013

Matthew 14 and Mark 6 record an appalling incident in the life of Herod the tetrarch. A close look at this incident points to a very serious matter that churches need to consider.

The Preceding Wickedness of Herod

Herod had married Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mark 6:17). John the Baptist continually rebuked him for doing so, charging him that what he was doing was unlawful (Matt. 14:4). Herod hated John for doing so and wanted to kill him (Matt. 14:5). He had John imprisoned (Mark 6:17), even though he knew that John was a just and holy man (Mark 6:20).

The Role of Entertainment in Furthering Herod’s Wickedness

On his birthday, Herod and his many esteemed guests feasted (Mark 6:21). As part of their entertainment on this occasion, the daughter of Herodias, Herod’s wife, danced in front of Herod and his guests (Mark 6:21).

They were all pleased with her dancing (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22). In fact, Herod was so taken with her dancing that he publicly offered to grant her whatever she might ask him (Matt. 14:7), as long as it was not more than half of his kingdom (Mark 6:23).

In consultation with her mother (Mark 6:24), she asked that John be beheaded immediately (Mark 6:25) and his head brought to her in a charger (Matt. 14:8). In spite of his intense sorrow about the situation that he was now in (Matt. 14:9; Mark 6:26), Herod consented and ordered that John be executed (Matt. 14:9; Mark 6:27). Jesus’ disciples heard of John’s tragic death, obtained his body, and buried it (Mark 6:29). They informed Jesus about what had happened to John (Mark 6:30).

The Unstated Yet Plainly Sensual Nature of the Entertainment That Contributed to Herod’s Killing John

Scripture does not explicitly say (in either of the two accounts of this horrible incident) that the dancing of Herodias’ daughter that so pleased Herod and his guests was sensual. Any non-naive and honest reader of the accounts, however, unmistakably knows that her dancing was pleasing to him precisely because it intensely appealed to his sexual lust.

The Holy Spirit did not deem it at all necessary to specify that her dancing was sensual—He expects rightly that the reader will understand exactly what its nature was from the information that He chose to provide. In this way, He instructs believers about a crucial point of how to interpret Scripture—God can clearly communicate truth about the essential character of an activity without ever having to explicitly specify that truth.

How Herod’s Enslavement to His Fleshly Lusts Was Intensified Through Sensual Entertainment in spite of His Previous Encounters with God’s Truth from a Faithful Man of God

Herod used to love to hear John speak to him (Mark 6:20). John was a faithful prophet of God who undoubtedly proclaimed God’s truth faithfully to Herod. In spite of hearing that truth on repeated occasions, Herod was yet living in gross sin.

Because of his sinful living, Herod was a man who was enslaved to his sexual lust. Tragically, hearing God’s truth faithfully proclaimed to him by a superb man of God did not profit him savingly.

Instead, enslavement to his fleshly lusts and the intense stoking of that lust through the sensual entertainment that he experienced on this crucial occasion led him not only not to be saved but also to destroy the very man of God whom he had liked hearing on many occasions. Instead of heeding the gospel that had been given to him previously by John, Herod, faced with sensual entertainment that intensified his already strongly being consumed with his lusts, increased greatly in his wickedness by murdering him.

The Grave Danger That the Sensuality of CCM in Churches Poses for Herod-Like People Who Attend Their Services

Many people who attend services in Christian churches are enslaved to their sexual lusts. This is especially true for many of the younger people in our churches who are incessantly bombarded with sensuality in virtually every context outside of their churches.

Tragically, when they come to a contemporary service in a church that plays sensual Christian music, they are put in a situation similar to the one Herod encountered when the daughter of Herodias danced sensually before him. At the same time that they hear various gospel truths about God, just as Herod had, they are put in a situation of continuing to feed their sensual lusts through music that is sensual.

Barring a gracious and miraculous work of intervention by God, they will become more enslaved to their fleshly lusts even while they are hearing some grand truths about the gospel of God. Even if God does mercifully save them in spite of the CCM, the sensuality-laden music will hinder their becoming disciples of Christ who mortify the lusts of their flesh (Col. 3:5) in order to follow Christ fully for His sake and for the sake of the gospel.

An Earnest Plea to All Brethren to Forsake the Use of CCM in Christian Ministry

Many who believe in the propriety of using of CCM in Christian ministry argue that the Bible never says that music itself can be sensual or that such and such styles are sensual. Applying what Matthew 14 and Mark 6 reveal to us about dancing that is sensual even though there is not anything said explicitly in either passage about it being sensual, the Holy Spirit teaches us that God does not have to state explicitly that something is sensual in order to communicate to us that it is.

Even though Scripture does not say anything directly about specific styles of music (such as CCM that uses rock music) being sensual, we still are not justified in concluding that we cannot say that such music is inherently sensual. A sound application of Matthew 14 and Mark 6 to the CCM issue shows us that God expects us to learn from statements such as “sing as an harlot” (Isaiah 23:15) and others (cf. Ezek. 33:31-32; Amos 6:4-6) that there is music that inherently appeals to fleshly lusts.

We must shun completely the use of sensual music in our churches. I earnestly appeal to all believers not to endanger themselves and others gravely through using CCM in their churches.

Beware Endangering Yourself and Others through Music

In CCM, Discipleship, Music

Marilyn Monroe, Happy Birthday, and the CCM Debate

May 9, 2013

Can music be sensual only if the lyrics that are sung are sensual? A video of Marilyn Monroe’s singing Happy Birthday to President John F. Kennedy conclusively answers this question and supports the validity of many of the concerns raised concerning the use of CCM in Christian ministry.

Marilyn Monroe’s Singing Happy Birthday

The introduction of the Wikipedia article on Marilyn Monroe provides the following information:

Marilyn Monroe^[1][2] (born Norma Jeane Mortenson; June 1, 1926 – August 5, 1962)^[3] was an American actress, model, and singer, who became a major sex symbol, starring in a number of commercially successful motion pictures during the 1950s and early 1960s.^[4][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_Monroe; accessed 5/9/13; formatting is in the original; hyperlinks have been removed]

Searching marilyn monroe happy birthday jfk on Youtube brings up several videos of her singing Happy Birthday to President John F. Kennedy. I asked a friend to record the following mp3 audio excerpt from one of those videos: Marilyn Monroe Singing Happy Birthday to JFK.

To assess properly whether her singing was sensual or not, be sure to listen to the full audio recording (1 minute) carefully. (Watching the video before listening to the audio will detract from the value of this audio).

Music Can Be Sensual without Having Sensual Lyrics

Listening to the audio of her singing the song Happy Birthday, which has no sensual lyrics, shows that music can be sensual without the singing of any sensual words. Watching the video fully confirms that what she was singing was sensual, but it is not necessary to watch it to know that her music was sensual.[1]

Relevance for the CCM Debate

This video falsifies the views of those who say that the only way music can be sensual is if it has sensual lyrics. The assertion, therefore, that CCM is not sensual music because the lyrics are acceptable is invalid.

Furthermore, credible secular musicians and music authorities testify that pop and rock music are sensual:

Rock ‘n’ roll by definition and popular music is about sexuality. (Gene Simmons, member of the rock band KISS)

The sex is definitely in the music, and sex is in all aspects in the [rock] music. (Luke Campbell of 2 Live Crew)

Rock ‘n’ roll is 99% sex. (John Oates of Hall and Oates, American rock star)

Rock music has one appeal only, a barbaric appeal, to sexual desire, not love, but sexual desire undeveloped and untutored. (Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind)

CCM weds Christian lyrics with these sensual styles of music. Because believers must not make any provision for the lust of the flesh to fulfill its lusts (Rom. 13:14), they must not partake of such sensual music—regardless of what the message of the lyrics may be.

[1] I do not recommend watching the video.

In CCM, Discipleship, Music

Gene Simmons, American Idol, and the CCM Debate

May 8, 2013

On an occasion when he was a guest judge for the TV show American Idol, Gene Simmons, a member of the rock group KISS, made some telling remarks that pertain to the ongoing debate about the use of CCM in Christian ministry. Speaking to Jeff Johnson, a praise and worship leader who was a contestant on the show, Simmons categorically asserted that popular music and rock music are unfit for Christian ministry because of their essential ungodly character:

“If you sing pop lyrics, you are going to have a problem with your ministry because rock n’ roll by definition, and popular music, is about sexuality.” A judge then interjected, “And demons.” Simmons then repeated, “And demons.”

Arguing that Simmons is a lost man, some dismiss his remarks about the unworthiness of pop and CCM for Christian ministry. Titus 1:10-13 shows us, however, that we must not automatically dismiss his remarks just because he is a lost man (see my post Titus 1 and the CCM Debate for an explanation of how it is legitimate to use such statements by lost people).

As a legendary rock musician, Simmons provides expert testimony to the essential sensuality of rock music. His statement furnishes us with additional sound evidence to reject CCM as unfit for Christian ministry.

See also this post for another reason that we should reject CCM.

In CCM, Music

The Testimony of Meghan O’Gieblyn, Romans 14, and the CCM Debate

May 2, 2013

In the ongoing debate about CCM, many Christians argue that Romans 14 supports the propriety of their using CCM in Christian churches. An application of Romans 14, however, to the testimony of Meghan O’Gieblyn’s experience with Christianity and CCM supports rejecting the use of CCM in churches.

The Testimony of Meghan O’Gieblyn

Writing in Guernica, an online magazine about art and politics, Meghan O’Gieblyn relates the role that she believes CCM played in her Christian experience (Sniffing Glue: A Childhood in Christian Pop). She writes,

I was homeschooled up until tenth grade, and my social life revolved around church. I grew up submersed in evangelical youth culture: reading Brio magazine, doing devotions in my Youth Walk Bible, eagerly awaiting the next installment of the Left Behind series, and developing a taste in music that ran the gamut from Christian rap to Christian pop to Christian rock. . . .

“Meeting kids where they’re at” was a relatively new concept for the church. My parents had grown up in an era when teens were supposed to sit in the pew and sing hymns along with everyone else. When I reached middle school, Christian youth leaders were anxiously discussing the battle for “cultural relevance”—one of the many marketing terms adopted by evangelicals. In the ’90s, mainline Protestant churches were losing members to the growing evangelical movement. With the explosion of rock-concert-style megachurches, many traditional congregations incorporated contemporary worship services in order to attract young people. For our dwindling Baptist congregation, this meant scrapping the organs and old hymns with arcane lyrics like “Now I raise my Ebenezer,” and replacing them with praise choruses led by “worship teams” of college kids with guitars and electric violins. It meant sermons full of pop culture allusions, with juicy titles (“Marriage in the Line of Fire,” “The Young and the Righteous”) designed to make conservative values seem radical and hip. . . .

I saw MTV for the first time when I was thirteen. My parents, like most of my friends’ parents, didn’t have cable, and I literally had to go halfway around the world to see it. In November of 1995, my grandfather went on a trip to Moscow and took my sister Sheena and me along. . . . It was supposed to be an educational experience, but we hardly left the hotel. All week, he attended back-to-back meetings while Sheena and I stayed in our room, eating duty-free chocolate and gorging ourselves on Euro MTV.

On one of those gray afternoons I saw Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” video. In a smoky warehouse, the band and a team of tattooed cheerleaders performed for bleachers full of kids. As the song progresses, the scene dissolves into anarchy. . . . I watched this perched on the edge of my bed, about three feet from the TV screen. . . . I didn’t catch any of the lyrics, but I was mesmerized. . . . I couldn’t have told you what the word “irony” meant, but I knew I’d been cheated by Christian rock. This was crack, and I’d been wasting my time sniffing glue. . . .

Despite all the affected teenage rebellion, I continued to call myself a Christian into my early twenties. When I finally stopped, it wasn’t because being a believer made me uncool or outdated or freakish. It was because being a Christian no longer meant anything. It was a label to slap on my Facebook page, next to my music preferences. The gospel became just another product someone was trying to sell me, and a paltry one at that because the church isn’t Viacom: it doesn’t have a Department of Brand Strategy and Planning. Staying relevant in late consumer capitalism requires highly sophisticated resources and the willingness to tailor your values to whatever your audience wants. In trying to compete in this market, the church has forfeited the one advantage it had in the game to attract disillusioned youth: authenticity. When it comes to intransigent values, the profit-driven world has zilch to offer. If Christian leaders weren’t so ashamed of those unvarnished values, they might have something more attractive than anything on today’s bleak moral market. In the meantime, they’ve lost one more kid to the competition. (bold text is in italics in the original)

From this brief sampling of Meghan’s testimony, we learn that Meghan was homeschooled, did devotions in her Bible, and grew up in a church that had organs and sang “old hymns that had arcane lyrics.” She was part of a Baptist church that later changed from that approach to music and became a church that “incorporated contemporary worship services in order to attract young people.”

Later, after she had encountered MTV and secular rock, she felt that she had been “cheated by Christian rock.” After her early twenties, she stopped calling herself a Christian. She views herself as “one more kid” whom Christian leaders “lost . . . to the competition.”

Applying Romans 14 to Meghan’s Testimony

At a minimum, we must understand that Meghan believes that her exposure to CCM in her local church contributed to the process that eventually led her to secular rock and then to the point where she now no longer calls herself a Christian. As such, she testifies plainly to the horrific results that came about in the life of a child who was in a Baptist church that regularly exposed her to CCM.

In Romans 14, Paul unequivocally asserts that Christians must never do anything that would cause a brother to stumble:

Rom 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

Rom 14:15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.

Rom 14:20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

²¹ It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

Yet, exposure to CCM in her local church did contribute to Meghan’s stumbling. Moreover, an examination of the comments to Meghan’s article reveals that many others have had similar experiences of turning from Christianity in part because of the CCM that they encountered in churches.

Applying Romans 14 and Meghan’s Testimony to the CCM Debate

Meghan was in a Baptist church that changed its music. She no longer calls herself a Christian. CCM contributed to her current tragic state. Many others have had a similar experience.

Many children attend services today in churches that use CCM. Romans 14 makes clear that churches must never do something that would have the possibility of contributing to people turning from the faith, as exposure to CCM did for Meghan, but the use of CCM by these churches puts these children at risk of having a similar tragic experience.

Even if Meghan were the only person who had ever had such an experience, believers would be obligated to reject the use of CCM in their churches so that they would not put even one other child at such risk. Sound churches that have rejected the use of CCM in their churches must continue to do so, especially for the sake of the children in their churches.

May God help us not to do any such thing that may contribute in any way to even one child in our churches turning from the faith.

In CCM, Discipleship, Music

New Book by Shelly Hamilton about CCM

March 1, 2013

I have worked with Shelly Hamilton at Majesty Music for a number of years now. For the past many months, I have had the privilege of interacting with her extensively as she worked to complete the writing of a book about CCM.

Shelly has researched this subject carefully for many years. Her musical giftedness, solid Christian training, dedication to serving Christ, and gracious desire and intense burden to help people with this difficult subject have uniquely prepared her for advancing the kingdom of God and His righteousness through her book Why I Dont Listen to Contemporary Christian Music.

In the 103 pages of this book, Shelly covers many key topics, including Is Music Neutral?; The Rock Beat; The Pop Singing Style; Intent and Motive; Biblical Teaching about Music; Rock by Its Fruit and Association; A Musical Line; The Power of Music in the Church; and What Are a Christian’s Musical Options?

If you are looking for some solid help to discern answers to the musical and biblical issues that CCM poses for believers, I heartily recommend that you give this work a careful hearing.

For more help with issues concerning CCM, please see my post Resources That Provide Answers to Key Issues Concerning CCM

In CCM, Christian Books

Did an Unholy Spirit from God Torment Saul?

February 14, 2013

When king Saul rebelled against God, God judged Him by rejecting him from being king of Israel (1 Sam. 15:23). After Samuel anointed his successor, David, the Holy Spirit came upon David from that day onward (16:13). By contrast, “the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him” (16:14).

Was the spirit from God that tormented Saul an unholy spirit or was he an angel who was sent by God to distress Saul? Some believers are troubled to think that this spirit was actually an evil spirit in the sense of being a demon. For them, for God to use such a spirit creates theological problems with their view of God and His separateness from sin.[1]

An examination of many similar Scripture passages helps to answer the question of the identity of the spirit that tormented Saul.

1. Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan, who could only have assaulted them had God permitted him to do so (see point 2 for Scriptural support for this interpretation):

2Co 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.

2. Job was assaulted by Satan on more than one occasion when God gave him permission to do so:

Job 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2:6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.

3. Because of his sinfulness, God judged king Ahab through a lying spirit:

2Ch 18:18 Again he said, Therefore hear the word of the LORD; I saw the LORD sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left.

¹⁹ And the LORD said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner.

²⁰ Then there came out a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will entice him. And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith?

²¹ And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And the LORD said, Thou shalt entice him, and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do even so.

²² Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil against thee.

4. Paul’s affliction at the hands of Satan was divinely given him:

2Co 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

The use of the divine passive (“was given”) shows that God was the One who allowed Paul to be afflicted by Satan.

5. God will judge many people in the future who will have rejected His truth by sending strong delusion upon them, which will be the work of evil spirits:

2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

⁹ Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

¹⁰ And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

¹¹ And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

¹² That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

These five passages provide ample biblical support for holding that king Saul was tormented by an unholy spirit from God and not just a “distressing spirit” (1 Sam. 16:14 in the NKJV). In addition, the Spirit’s departure from Saul prior to the evil spirit’s coming upon him also points to his being an unholy spirit that came to torment Saul once the Holy Spirit was no longer upon him (cf. 1 Sam. 10:6).

[1] Additionally, the identification of this spirit as an evil spirit versus a distressing spirit has vital bearing on determining the moral character of the instrumental music that David played for Saul (see my post Correcting a Wrong Handling of the Accounts of David’s Music Ministry to Saul).

In CCM, Interpretation, Music, Theology

From Heavy Metal, Soft Rock, and Pop to Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs

February 6, 2013

As an unsaved child and junior high, high school, and college student, I listened to a wide variety of music, including heavy metal, soft rock, and pop. Growing up in an Indian home, I also had very extensive exposure to Hindi music, especially music from Indian movies.

Music was an especially vital part of my life from about junior high onward. At one point, I even wanted to be a lead guitarist and vocalist for a rock band.

In college, I took guitar classes and lessons and longed to learn how to play rock music. Although I tried very hard to learn how to play it, I never was able to figure out how to play the rhythms of that music. Most of the few rock solo parts that I did learn to play, I learned from a few close friends who also played guitar.

In contrast to my very limited success in learning to play rock music, I was able to develop extensive abilities in note reading and strumming and picking chords for songs that did not have a rock beat to them. In addition, considerable exposure to classical music during these years, both through my guitar lessons and through close connections with many college friends who were classical musicians, developed a deep love and appreciation in me for classical music.

Although I had listened to many different styles of music in my life, I did not have much exposure to Christian hymnody before I was saved. In the years leading up to my conversion, I did attend services occasionally at an Assembly of God church, but I have no recollection of the music that I heard on those occasions.

Shortly after I became a Christian, I began attending services regularly at an independent Baptist church in Cookeville, TN. In that church, I first experienced extensively Christian hymnody and other sacred music that was sung and played in a way that was distinct from all the music (except for the classical music and the other sacred songs that I had heard before) that I can recall ever having heard prior to that point in my life.

My experience of this new music was not just that I was singing words that I had not sung before—there was an entirely different feel to this music. This sacred music did not bring back to my mind the earlier styles that I had saturated my mind with over the years.

Now, after 23 years of being immersed in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, I am readily able to detect a difference between what I first heard in my first church and what I hear today in Christian music sung and performed in contemporary styles. Whereas the former never recalls to my mind secular music that I have heard, CCM readily does so.

As one who first had his mind immersed for many years in the world’s music and then immersed for many years in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, I find it regrettable that good brethren assert that CCM is acceptable music for divine worship. Not having the background that I have, many of them do not understand the harmful effects that the musical styles of CCM—regardless of the words—are having upon them.

Furthermore, even after years of being a believer, I find that I still have within me a deep affinity for rock music, pop, and other music that is played and sung in worldly styles. Based on my extensive experiential knowledge of the world’s music and of sacred music that is clearly distinct in style from the world’s music, it is clear to me that CCM has no place in the life of a dedicated believer and should be eradicated from every church that desires to glorify God in its worship.

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.

In CCM, Music, Testimony

Correcting a Wrong Handling of the Accounts of David's Music Ministry to Saul

January 16, 2013

Scripture provides three accounts of David’s music ministry to Saul (1 Sam. 16:14-23; 18:10-11; 19:8-10). Because the results of his ministry to Saul in the first account were different from the results in the other two, some have wrongly concluded that David’s music was unreliable and even have dismissed the value of the first account for addressing the issue of the morality of music without words.

A close examination of key differences between the first account and the latter accounts, however, provides the right explanation of the differing outcome in the latter accounts and underscores the value of the first account.

David’s Music Ministry Delivers Saul from Demonic Affliction (1 Sam. 16:14-23)

God judged Saul by sending an evil spirit to afflict him (1 Sam. 16:14). To relieve him of his affliction, Saul’s servants sought a skillful harpist to minister to him (1 Sam. 16:15-16). In some unexplained way, they had confidence that such a ministry of music would deliver Saul from his affliction.

Saul’s servants found David and brought him to Saul (1 Sam. 16:17-22). Whenever the evil spirit troubled Saul, David’s playing made Saul better and caused the demon to depart (1 Sam. 16:23).

The passage does not say anything about David’s singing any words to Saul as he played his harp. In fact, the passage stresses David’s playing through three explicit references about the playing of the harp (1 Sam. 16:16, 18, 23).

It was David’s instrumental harp music, therefore, that caused the evil spirit that tormented Saul to depart from him. Had his music been amoral, it could not have had this effect for good.

Because the music did drive out the evil spirit, it was a force for good. We thus learn that David’s instrumental music was not amoral.

Saul Tries to Kill David Twice in spite of David’s Music Ministry to Him (18:10-11)

Whereas David’s music ministry had previously delivered Saul on repeated occasions for an unspecified amount of time (1 Sam. 16:23), the next account (1 Sam. 18:10-11) records that Saul tried to kill David twice (18:11) in spite of his ministering musically again to Saul (18:11). What caused there to be such a dramatic difference on this occasion compared to the previous ones?

In between these two accounts, we read of David’s valiant defeat of Goliath (17:1-54). Following several verses that speak then of Saul’s inquiry about whose son David was (17:55-58), we read of the covenant that Jonathan and David made (18:1-4).

The next five verses provide key information that explains the differing outcome of David’s music ministry to Saul on this later occasion:

1Sa 18:5 And David went out whithersoever Saul sent him, and behaved himself wisely: and Saul set him over the men of war, and he was accepted in the sight of all the people, and also in the sight of Saul’s servants.

⁶ ¶ And it came to pass as they came, when David was returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, that the women came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet king Saul, with tabrets, with joy, and with instruments of musick.

⁷ And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.

⁸ And Saul was very wroth, and the saying displeased him; and he said, They have ascribed unto David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands: and what can he have more but the kingdom?

⁹ And Saul eyed David from that day and forward.

These verses reveal that Saul became very upset when the women lauded David more highly than they did Saul (18:8). He then became jealous of him and suspicious of him from then on that he would seek to take the kingdom from Saul (18:9).

Right after reading about this key change in Saul’s attitude toward David, we encounter the first of two accounts that record that David’s music ministry to Saul did not benefit him as it had done before:

1Sa 18:10 ¶ And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as at other times: and there was a javelin in Saul’s hand.

¹¹ And Saul cast the javelin; for he said, I will smite David even to the wall with it. And David avoided out of his presence twice.

This passage specifies that this account took place on the very next day after Saul’s becoming intensely upset at David and becoming suspicious of him (18:10a). This time when the evil spirit came on Saul, he raved madly in his house. The text also specifies that Saul had a javelin in his hand on this occasion.

Prior to this point, we never read of Saul sitting in his house with a javelin in his hand. Nor do we read of him being afflicted by the spirit to the point of his raving madly. Both these differences point to the same reality—a vital change in Saul’s disposition toward David.

The natural explanation for Saul’s having a javelin in his hand now is that he apparently was so suspicious of David’s potentially trying to take the kingdom from him that he wanted to have a weapon to protect himself should David try anything to harm him. Because of the dramatic change in Saul, David’s music ministry that was the same to him “as at other times” (18:10) did not deliver Saul now from his spiritual affliction.

Saul’s intense jealousy and mistrust of David prevented him from benefiting from David’s music ministry as he had done before. He now degenerated to letting the wickedness of his heart come out in two attempts to kill David.

David’s music thus was not unreliable or ineffective on this occasion. Rather, Saul, as the listener, forfeited on this occasion the value of David’s ministry to him because of his hardness of heart toward David.

Saul Again Tries to Kill David in spite of His Music Ministry to Him (19:9-10)

Saul’s two attempts to kill David show that Saul was now not just opposing David—more importantly, he was also actively fighting against God, who had chosen David to become king in place of Saul. Saul had thereby now set himself in opposition to the Lord and His anointed one (cf. Ps. 2).

Because Saul was now opposing both God and David, he continued to degenerate spiritually and be hardened in his sinfulness (1 Sam. 18:17, 21, 25). He became more and more afraid of David and became his enemy continually (1 Sam. 18:29).

In spite of further events (1 Sam. 19:1-5) that led Saul even to swear by the Lord that David would not be killed (1 Sam. 19:6), we read of another time when Saul tried to kill David despite David’s music ministry to him while he was being afflicted by the evil spirit:

1Sa 19:9 And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand.

¹⁰ And Saul sought to smite David even to the wall with the javelin; but he slipped away out of Saul’s presence, and he smote the javelin into the wall: and David fled, and escaped that night.

This final account shows that Saul’s hardness of heart toward David and opposition to God again caused him to forfeit the benefit of David’s music ministry to him.

David’s Instrumental Music Was Not Amoral and It Was Not Unreliable

A careful analysis of the flow of these various events in the lives of David and Saul shows that David’s earlier music ministry profited Saul by delivering him from spiritual affliction caused by an evil spirit. Because Saul was delivered by David’s instrumental music, we understand that it was not amoral.

Moreover, the latter accounts do not show that David’s music was unreliable or lacked the spiritual ability to deliver Saul consistently. Rather, the greatly heightened wickedness of Saul’s heart on those occasions prevented him from receiving the benefit of David’s music ministry to him.

For the same reason, the latter accounts also do not negate the importance of the first account for showing that David’s instrumental music was not amoral. David’s instrumental music ministry to Saul thus was not amoral and it was not unreliable.

In CCM, Exposition, Music

Archives For CCM

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: