Archives For Interpretation

¡Cuidado con los peligros de la música!*

January 23, 2014

Aunque muchos creyentes piensan que no es posible que se pongan en peligro a sí mismos y a los demás a través de la música si tiene palabras cristianas, una cuidadosa atención a la revelación bíblica y otras pruebas relativas a los espíritus caídos y sus influencias en la música humana demuestra lo contrario. El siguiente tratamiento de esa revelación y la evidencia nos advierte contra los peligros que hay para otros y para nosotros mismos a través de la música.

Espíritus caídos y sus actividades

Dios es el único Ser eterno (Salmo 90:2; Juan 1:1-2), y Él creó todo lo que existe (Gen. 1:1, Juan 1:3), incluyendo todos los seres espirituales sobrenaturales (Gen. 2:1; Éxodo 20:11; Neh. 9:6; Salmo 148:1-5; Col. 1:16). Los seres espirituales sobrenaturales mencionados en la Biblia incluyen los serafines (Isaías 6:2), los querubines (Génesis 3:24), los cuatro seres vivientes (Rev. 4:8), los santos ángeles (Mateo 25:31), y los malos espíritus (Hechos 19:12).

Como Dios no es el autor del mal (Génesis 1:31; cf. Santiago 1:13), sabemos que los malos espíritus que se mencionan en las Escrituras fueron creados como seres espirituales santos (Ezequiel 28:14-15a; ver Judas 6). En algún momento después de su creación, se rebelaron contra Dios y se convirtieron en espíritus caídos (Ezequiel 28:15b; cf. Judas 6; 2 Pedro 2:4).

Los espíritus caídos tienen la intención de negar a Dios la gloria que Él solo merece de sus criaturas (Is. 14:12-14; cf. Col. 2:18; Ap. 9:20). Tratan de hacer daño a tantas de sus criaturas como sea posible para lograr su destrucción (cf. Mat. 8:32; Juan 8:44, Hechos 19:12), especialmente los seres humanos (Lucas 13:16; Hechos 10:38; 1 Ped. 5:8).

Debido a que el Padre desea que la gente le adore en espíritu y en verdad (Juan 4:23-24), podemos estar seguros de que los espíritus caídos quieren evitar que la gente le de esa adoración. Sin lugar a dudas, lo hacen de forma continua en todo el mundo, ya sea a través de la prevención por completo (2 Corintios 4:3-4; Col. 2:18; Ap. 9:20) o a través de la corrupción de la adoración en tantas formas como sea posible (cf. 2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 4:1-3).

Los espíritus caídos han influido a los seres humanos a hacer cosas malas sin que ellos se den cuenta de esta influencia (1 Crónicas 21:1; 1 Reyes 22:22; 2 Cor. 11:14). Han tenido esta influencia encubierta sobre los incrédulos (1 Reyes 22:22; Juan 13:27) igual que sobre los creyentes (1 Crónicas 21:1; Hechos 5:3).

Los espíritus caídos y la música en las Escrituras

Los ángeles cantaron cuando Dios creó la tierra y todo en ella (Job 38:6-7). Los ángeles tocan las trompetas (Éxodo 19:16; Ap. 8:2) y los seres espirituales celestiales adoran a Dios, juegan arpas, y cantan alabanzas a Dios y al Cordero (Apocalipsis 4:8-11; 5:8-14). Sabemos, pues, que los seres espirituales sobrenaturales, incluyendo los espíritus caídos, son seres musicales (ver este post para más explicaciones sobre este punto).

Los espíritus caídos han observado y escuchado toda la adoración del cielo que ha incluido la música (Job 38:6-7; Salmo 148:2; cf. Is. 6:3). Ellos saben por experiencia cómo suena la música celestial que le agrada a Dios.

Los espíritus caídos han observado las actividades de los seres humanos desde el principio de la humanidad (Génesis 3; 2 Cor. 11:3; cf. Job 1:7). Ellos saben exactamente lo que el hombre ha hecho de la música que ha complacido a Dios (por ejemplo, 2 Crón. 5:11-14).

Los espíritus caídos saben acerca de la música instrumental piadosa producida por un hombre lleno del Espíritu que expulsó a un espíritu malo de otro hombre (1 Sam. 16:14-23). Entonces, hay por lo menos un espíritu caído que ha experimentado personalmente el poder espiritual de la música piadosa (1 Sam. 16:23).

Los espíritus caídos tienen pleno conocimiento también de la música que el hombre ha hecho que no le ha complacido a Dios (por ejemplo, Is. 5:11-12; Dan. 3:5-7; 10; 15). Ellos, sin duda, juegan un papel importante en las actividades musicales de multitudes de personas que fueron destruidas en el Diluvio porque “todo designio de los pensamientos del corazón de ellos era de continuo solamente el mal” (Génesis 4:21 cf. Génesis 6:5; ver este post para una explicación completa de este punto clave).

Después del diluvio, en una ocasión particularmente sórdida, los espíritus caídos influyeron a la gente que había comido carne ofrecida a un ídolo en el culto sincretista de Jehová a cantar. El Espíritu Santo destaca su manera de cantar con una referencia explícita a su canto (Éxodo 32: 17-18). Debido a que el canto fue producido por la gente baja la influencia de los demonios (cf. 1 Cor. 10:20), comiendo, bebiendo y jugando idolátricamente (1 Corintios 10:7; incluyendo el baile impío [Éxodo 32:19]) de una manera tan mala y descontrolada que aun sus enemigos se avergonzaban de ellos (Éxodo 32:25), podemos estar seguros de que su canto a Jehová era malo también.

Los espíritus caídos y la música peligrosa

Teniendo en cuenta todo lo que sabemos acerca de los objetivos y actividades de los espíritus caídos y sobre todo su conocimiento de la música que agrada a Dios y la música que no le complace, los creyentes no deben ser en lo más mínimo despectivos en cuanto al papel de los espíritus caídos en la producción de los estilos musicales que son populares e impíos (Ef. 2:2-3, 1 Juan 5:19). Más bien, tenemos todas las razones para creer que los espíritus caídos han influido y seguirán influyendo a tantas personas como sea posible a escuchar y producir música que no agrada a Dios, sobre todo en su adoración a él.

De hecho, muchos músicos populares han declarado en diversas formas que la fuente de su música ha sido las influencias sobrenaturales fuera de sí mismos.[1] Los creyentes no deben rechazar tales testimonios—deben mantenerse lo más alejado posible de cualquier tipo de música, aunque tenga palabras cristianas, cuando hay la más mínima posibilidad de que los espíritus caídos hayan jugado un papel en el origen de esa música peligrosa.

Conclusión

Los cristianos deben rechazar (Sal. 1:1; Ef. 5:11) toda la música, incluyendo música con palabras cristianas, que emplea estilos musicales populares e impíos que los humanos malvados han producido con fines perversos explícitamente planteados, como la música rock, porque hay consideraciones bíblicas y fundamentales y testimonios personales que apuntan a los espíritus caídos como el origen sobrenatural de esos estilos impíos. ¡Cuidado con los peligros de la música!

 

 

[1] Las siguientes citas son de una página que he encontrado haciendo una búsqueda en Google sobre los malos espíritus y la música rock:

David Bowie: “Rock has always been THE DEVIL’S MUSIC. . .” (Rolling Stone, Feb. 12, 1976);

John Lennon: “I’ve sold my soul to the DEVIL.” (Ray Coleman, Lennon, p.256);

Little Richard: “I’m the Rock ‘n Roll singer that you heard about through the years. . . I was directed and commanded by another power. The power of DARKNESS. . . The power of the DEVIL, SATAN.” (Charles White, The Life and Times of Little Richard, pp. 205-206);

During a 1993 Oprah Winfrey interview, Michael Jackson, explained the reason for some of his filthy sexual gestures during his concerts: “It happens subliminally. IT’S THE MUSIC THAT COMPELS ME TO DO IT. You don’t think about it, it just happens. I’M SLAVE TO THE RHYTHM.” (The Evening Star, Feb. 11, 1993, p. A10)

—http:/ / www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils % 20en % 20America/CCM/hip_hop.htm ; visitada 17/01/14; 15:55

También encontré las siguientes fuentes en la misma búsqueda: Tenga en cuenta los testimonios prestados en el punto II de este artículo web (http://truediscipleship.org/Gtopics/general108.htm; visitada 01/17/14; 15:59) y los numerosos testimonios de los propios músicos de rock de este artículo ( http://www.inplainsite.org/html/voices_of_rock.html ; visitada 17/01/14; 16:09), ver también los testimonios similares en un artículo similar (http://wayoflife.org/index_files/rock_musicians_as_mediums.html ; visitada 17/01/14; 16:14).

Por favor, tenga en cuenta que no he verificado de forma independiente las citas provistas en estas fuentes. Sin embargo no tengo ninguna razón para dudar de su veracidad, sobre todo porque varias fuentes proporcionan algunas de las mismas cotizaciones.

*I’d like to thank my friend Jeremy Patterson for his help in translating the English version of this article into Spanish.

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Spanish, Theology
 permalink

The Importance of 1 Samuel 16:14-23 for a Sound Theology of Music

January 9, 2014

First Samuel 16 reveals several truths that are lacking in the theology of music of many believers today. Because the Holy Spirit has inspired this passage of Scripture to profit us so that we will be thoroughly equipped to do every good work (2 Tim. 3:15-17), we must give close attention to this passage if we are to have a sound theology of music.

Godly music is not just about words that are sung

After informing us that the Spirit was on David from the day that Samuel anointed him (1 Sam. 16:13), First Samuel 16:14-23 immediately thereafter provides us with a lengthy report of how David’s skillfully playing the harp relieved Saul from terrible affliction:

1Sa 16:14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

 15 And Saul’s servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.

 16 Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.

 17 And Saul said unto his servants, Provide me now a man that can play well, and bring him to me.

 18 Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him.

 19 Wherefore Saul sent messengers unto Jesse, and said, Send me David thy son . . .

 23 And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him. (bold added to the original)

The flow of thought from 1 Samuel 16:13 to this passage shows that the passage is not merely stressing that a skillful harp player profited Saul, but that a Spirit-empowered skillful harp player did so (cf. “the Lord was with him” [16:18]). We know, therefore, that the skillful music that David was playing was not merely humanly produced instrumental music—it was divinely empowered instrumental music and therefore godly music.

Moreover, this passage speaks only of David’s skillfully playing the harp and does not say anything about his singing to Saul. In fact, five explicit references to the playing of a musical instrument (1 Sam. 16:16 [2x]; 17; 18; 23) show incontestably that God is emphasizing instrumental music—apart from any words— in this passage.

The passage thus stresses to us that David’s ministry of that solely instrumental music that was Spirit-empowered powerfully benefited Saul for good (1 Sam. 16:23). A sound theology of music, therefore, must account fully for the teaching of this passage that shows that godly music without words had powerful effects for good.

Godly music is not just about humans

An evil spirit was plaguing Saul (1 Sam. 16:14). To relieve him of his affliction that was caused by that spirit, his servants advised him with confidence that his availing himself of certain skillfully played instrumental music would make him well (1 Sam. 16:15-16).

Just as they had said, Saul’s receiving such ministry did refresh him and make him well (1 Sam. 16:23). David’s instrumental music did so because it had a profound spiritual effect of delivering him from the supernatural cause of his affliction—“the evil spirit departed from him” (1 Sam. 16:23)!

This passage shows that godly instrumental music drove away an evil spirit that was afflicting Saul. David’s godly instrumental music, therefore, not only had a beneficial spiritual effect on Saul—it also had a powerful spiritual effect on an evil spirit!

We must learn, therefore, that godly music without any words does not just affect humans; it also has effects on evil supernatural spirit beings. Although we should expect unbelievers to deny any such aspect of music and hold that music is only about humans, believers cannot and must not deny that godly instrumental music is not just about humans.

Godly music is not just about emotions

This passage shows that godly instrumental music ministered by a believer who had the Spirit upon him (1 Sam. 16:13) did not just profit Saul by changing his emotional state. Although it did benefit him emotionally, the instrumental music also profited him spiritually by driving away an evil spirit that was afflicting him!

We, therefore, must not make the serious mistake of restricting our understanding of godly instrumental music to its emotional effects on humans. Although the emotional effects of music on humans are very important, godly instrumental music has spiritual effects that go far beyond the effects that it has on the emotions of the hearer.

Discussion

A theology of music that understands that godly music must have lyrics for it to benefit other believers spiritually is an unbiblical theology. Rather, believers must hold that godly instrumental music also profits believers not just emotionally but also spiritually, including helping to relieve them from any oppression by evil spirits that they may be experiencing.

In the debates about what music and musical styles are fitting for believers, believers must not just talk about how various pieces and styles of music affect human emotions. They must also keep in mind that instrumental music has spiritual effects on both humans and supernatural beings.

Furthermore, demanding that people explain in detail how such spiritual effects are specifically mediated by specifics about how the godly instrumental music is played is an unbiblical insistence. God has not given us detailed explanations about how godly instrumental music influences the spiritual realm, and many such things may very likely be entirely beyond human comprehension (cf. John 3:8).

Simply because we cannot explain how godly instrumental music affects supernatural beings does not justify our denying that it does. The revelation given in First Samuel 16:14-23 demands that we accept what God teaches about the spiritual effects of godly instrumental music whether we can explain them or not.

Conclusion

A sound theology of music must reflect fully the important divine revelation provided about music in 1 Samuel 16:14-23.  God teaches us through this passage that a sound theology of music understands that not only is godly music not just about words that are sung, it also is not just about humans and their emotions.

Related posts:

David’s Instrumental Music Was Not Amoral

Did an Unholy Spirit from God Torment Saul?

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

Resources That Provide Answers to Key Issues concerning CCM

 

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Music, Theology
 permalink

Garland on Paul’s Teaching about Meat Offered to Idols

January 6, 2014

Commentator David E. Garland takes a position on Paul’s teaching about meat offered to idols that differs greatly from what many believers today hold. He teaches,

In this section [1 Cor. 10:23-11:1], Paul tries to insure that the Corinthians do not misconstrue what he says, as they had previously (5:9-10) and think that he is insisting that they withdraw completely from society and have nothing whatsoever to do with unbelievers. He clarifies that food is food, and it is permissible to eat unless it is specifically identified as idol food, which puts it in a special category that is always forbidden to Christians.—1 Corinthians in Baker ECNT (2003: 486)

He thus holds that knowingly eating idol food is never right for Christians to do. He further teaches,

Food that may have an idolatrous history may be eaten unless it is specifically identified as idol food. When it is identified as idol food, however, the principle of love must overrule assumed knowledge or presumed rights. They must abstain out of concern for another’s conscience as well as to avoid arousing the wrath of God for violating their covenantal obligations (489).

He also provides historical evidence that shows that not all meat sold in marketplaces was first offered to idols. He writes,

Paul’s permission to eat whatever is sold in the marketplace presumes that not everything offered for sale had been contaminated by idolatrous rituals (491-492).

If Garland is correct, as I believe he is, many believers today are holding a dangerously wrong view that eating meat offered to an idol knowingly is no problem for a believer who knows the truth that an idol is nothing and that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is also nothing (1 Cor. 10:19). Paul does not mean by these statements that it is ok for believers knowingly to eat meat that has been offered to an idol as long as it is not in the context of idolatry—knowingly eating meat that has been offered to an idol is never right for a Christian!

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Discipleship, Interpretation, Quotes
 permalink

Why 2 Kings 4:38-41 Shows That 1 Timothy 4:3-5 and 6:17 Do Not Automatically Justify CCM

January 2, 2014

I have deleted this post at this time so that I can fix parts of the article to clarify the position that I have held all along. I have not changed my position on the relevance of 2 Kings 4:38-41 in relation to 1 Tim. 4:3-5 and 6:17 and how they pertain to the issue of justifying CCM, but I do believe that the article will be better by my clarifying what I wrote.

Update:

While I continue to work on the full revised version of my article, I would like to share the following brief statements that present the basic gist of how 2 Kings 4:38-41 argues against the validity of justifying CCM through an argument based on creation.

1. Second Kings 4:38-41 shows that something that God originally created as good for food (the wild vine that produced gourds) was no longer good for that God-given purpose. Based on that data, it is illegitimate to claim based on the nature of the original good creation of God that all substances that God originally gave to man for food (plants and animals) are necessarily all still inherently good for the purposes for which God originally created them.

2. God did not create any musical styles. Even if He had created all musical styles originally as inherently good, a claim that all musical styles are all still inherently good for the purposes for which God originally gave music would similarly not be automatically true just because God would have originally created them.

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

On Singing, Dancing, and Playing Instruments in Scripture

December 31, 2013

Scripture speaks in at least 26 passages about various people dancing.[1] A close examination of three references to dancing in First Samuel brings out an important point about interpreting other passages in Scripture that mention both singing and dancing.

First Samuel 18:6-9

After David had killed Goliath, he served Saul faithfully wherever he sent him (1 Sam. 18:5a). David prospered, he was exalted by Saul to be over his army, and he was pleasing to all the people, including the servants of Saul (1 Sam. 18:5b-c).

When David was returning from killing Goliath, women came out from all the cities of Israel (1 Sam. 18:6a). These women were singing, dancing, and playing musical instruments when they went out to meet King Saul (and David):

1Sa 18:6 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.

This musical exaltation of David above Saul led to Saul’s becoming very angry and suspicious of David “from that day and forward” (1 Sam. 18:8-9).

This passage teaches us that there were at least some women in every city of Israel at this time who were able to sing, dance, and play musical instruments at the same time (cf. Exod. 15:20-21). Moreover, they thought it fitting to do all three in honoring those to whom they believed honor was due.

From this passage, we infer that music was an important part of life in all Israel at this time in its history. Two later references to the same event teach us an important point about music in relation to singing and dancing in the thinking of the people in one of the neighboring nations.

First Samuel 21:11 and 29:5

The Philistines were one of the key enemies of Israel in the days of Saul and David. Yet, when Saul began to try to kill David, David fled (1 Sam. 21:10) to Achish the king of Gath (a key city of the Philistines and the hometown of Goliath). Somehow, the servants of the king knew about the musical reception that Saul and David had received earlier when they returned from his killing Goliath:

1Sa 21:11 And the servants of Achish said unto him, Is not this David the king of the land? did they not sing one to another of him in dances, saying, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands?

Comparing their report of that event with what actually took place (1 Sam. 18:6-7) brings out two key points. First, the servants of Achish do not mention that it was the women of Israel who sang and danced when they greeted Saul and David with these words. Second, they make no mention of the women playing musical instruments on that occasion.

At a later time, a different situation yet included similar omissions in the reporting of that same event: When the Philistine princes were preparing to go to war with Israelites (1 Sam. 29:1-7), they objected to Achish’s allowing David and his men to join the Philistine forces in fighting the Israelites (1 Sam. 29:1-4). The princes said,

1Sa 29:5 Is not this David, of whom they sang one to another in dances, saying, Saul slew his thousands, and David his ten thousands?

Comparing all three texts shows that both of the Philistine reports do not mention that it was the women who sang and danced and that they played musical instruments when they sang these words about Saul and David.

This comparison shows that in two later reports about people who sang and danced on an important occasion, the people reporting the event did not think that it was necessary to mention that those who were singing and dancing on that occasion were also playing musical instruments while they were singing and dancing. Apparently, these people took for granted that telling others about singing and dancing taking place would be enough for their hearers to understand that the actual event included singing, dancing, and playing musical instruments.

Alternatively, their failure to mention the playing of music on that occasion could have stemmed from their not being told (by the source of their information) about any music being played at that event. In this case, we still see two clear instances in Scripture of people whose report about an event only talks about singing and dancing taking place when actually the event also included the playing of musical instruments.

The Relevance of These Passages for the Interpretation of Another Key Passage about Singing and Dancing 

Based on the biblical evidence treated above, I believe that we have scriptural warrant for understanding that any account in Scripture of people both singing and dancing was also an instance where there was the playing of musical instruments as well—whether or not the report of that event explicitly says anything about musical instruments being played. The strong Scriptural connection between instrumental music and dancing in many other passages supports this interpretation.[2]

This line of Scriptural reasoning has important implications for how we are to interpret what took place at another key occasion in the history of God’s people. The report of the Golden Calf incident shows that the people were singing (“the noise of them that sing do I hear” [Ex. 32:18]) and dancing (“he saw the calf and the dancing” [Ex. 32:19]) as part of their shameful behavior at this time (Ex. 32:25). Common sense, many other passages that link playing instruments and dancing, and the comparison of the three passages from First Samuel in this article point to the people playing musical instruments as well in the Golden Calf incident while the people were shamefully singing and dancing.

Based on this interpretation of the Golden Calf incident, the passage would further show that the composite sound that Moses and Joshua assessed from a distance to be ungodly—without hearing any of the words—was produced by the people singing and playing of instruments as well. The assessment of Moses and Joshua thus would point to the propriety of holding that music that includes both instrumental accompaniment and lyrics can be assessed to be ungodly by assessing its composite sound without knowing what the words are that are being sung.

 

[1] Exod. 15:20; 32:19; Jdg. 11:34; 21:21, 23; 1 Sam. 18:6; 21:11; 29:5; 30:16; 2 Sam. 6:14, 16; 1 Chr. 15:29; Job 21:11; Ps. 30:11; 149:3; 150:4; Eccl. 3:4; Isa. 13:21; Jer. 31:4, 13; Lam. 5:15; Matt. 11:17; 14:6; Mk. 6:22; Lk. 7:32; 15:25.

[2] Exod. 15:20-21; Jdg. 11:34; 2 Sam. 6:14-15 cf. 1 Chr. 15:27-29; Ps. 149:3; 150:4; Jer. 31:4-7; Lam. 5:14-15; Matt. 11:17; Lk. 15:25

 

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Interpretation, Music
 permalink

What the Birth Narratives of Jesus Teach Us about True “Social Justice”

December 26, 2013

“Social justice” is a leading concern for multitudes of people in our day. Some events in the birth narratives of Jesus teach us several truths about true social justice.

Social Arrogance Will Be Exposed 

In her song of praise to God her Savior, Mary exclaimed, “He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts” (Luke 1:51). Only God knows the true state of every human heart, and He hates it when any person is proud in heart.

Mary spoke of His scattering those who are proud in their thoughts, and the context suggests that she especially has in mind those who are proud against other people. Someday, all social arrogance among human beings will be exposed infallibly when God will deal with all people about their wrongly elevated opinions about themselves in relation to other human beings.

Unjust Civil Authorities Will Be Dethroned 

Mary testified that God “hath put down the mighty from their seats and exalted them of low degree” (Luke 1:52). For much of human history, unjust civil authorities have been causing incalculable human suffering throughout the world.

A glorious day is coming when “all oppression shall cease”! Wicked political leaders who have governed unjustly will be dethroned when Mary’s Son will come to rule over the entire world with perfect righteousness!

Jesus will abase every unrighteous ruler, and He will exalt the humble to reign with Him!

Unrighteous Wealth Distribution Will Be Ended 

Mary extolled God because “He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away” (Luke 1:53). Human history has been replete with those who have become rich through unrighteous means that have deprived others of good things.

God detests it when powerful rich people amass wealth by unfairly taking advantage of people, especially poor people. Someday, He will end all such unrighteous wealth distribution!

Unloving Ethnic Sentiment Will Be Eradicated 

Filled with the Spirit, Zacharias prophesied that God has redeemed His people Israel from the “hand of all that hate” them (Luke 1:67-71). From its beginning, the nation of Israel has been hated by evil people.

Anti-Semitism has led to many horrific instances of unloving treatment of Jewish people. God’s Son, Jesus Christ, will one day eradicate all such unloving ethnic sentiment when He again exalts His chosen people.

Ungodly Religious Suppression Will Be Eliminated 

Zacharias testified to God’s swearing with an oath to Abraham “that He would grant unto us [Israel], that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve Him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life” (Luke 1:73-75). The ungodly have suppressed true religion throughout human history.

Israel was often prevented from serving and worshiping God properly. Jesus will one day eliminate all ungodly religious suppression!

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exposition, Theology
 permalink

On Jubal, David, and the CCM Debate

December 21, 2013

As a justification for using CCM, some believers assert that good king David worshiped God using a harp that may have been invented by Jubal, an ungodly man. Is this a valid argument for using CCM?

Jubal as the Possible Inventor of Two Musical Instruments

In the first statement about musical instruments in Scripture, Moses tell us through inspiration of the Spirit that Jubal, a man in the ungodly line of Cain, may have invented[1] two instruments:

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

Why did the Spirit inspire Moses to give us this information and what are we supposed to learn from it? Because the passage itself does not expound further on the significance of this statement, there is uncertainty about its purpose beyond informing us about who originated some aspect of the playing of these instruments.

Because the Noahic Flood destroyed all humanity living at the time of Noah except Noah and certain members of his family, we cannot be certain that there was any direct connection between these instruments and the instruments called by the same names after the Flood. If neither Noah nor any of his surviving family played these instruments or knew of these instruments through some other means, it is possible that the knowledge of these two instruments was completely lost after the Flood and somebody else later invented similar instruments or even the same instruments without knowing anything about the harps and the organs of which Jubal originated the playing.

Furthermore, Scripture provides no indication that Jubal was the inventor of the other musical instruments mentioned in Scripture, such as the timbrel and the psaltery. This fact further cautions us not to make too much of his possibly inventing the instruments that he may have invented.

In fact, Scriptural emphasis on King David’s making musical instruments for divine worship (1 Chron. 23:5; 2 Chron. 7:6; 29:26-27; Neh. 12:36) makes a dogmatic assertion that David played the same instrument that Jubal possibly invented all the more a debatable point. If David actually invented some or all of these instruments instead of just commissioning the making of them or crafting them himself, the instruments that David played in divine worship may not have been traceable at all to the harp that Jubal possibly made.

A proper consideration of Jubal’s possibly inventing these two instruments, therefore, must account for these other truths from Scripture. These considerations show that David may or may not have played a harp possibly invented by Jubal.

Nevertheless, the rest of this post will examine what significance there would be for the debate about CCM if David did in fact play the same instrument that Jubal may have invented. To understand that significance, we need to take a closer look at Jubal’s originating the playing of the musical instruments that he did and the morality of David’s use of one of them.

A Closer Look at the Morality of David’s Use of the Harp that Jubal May Have Created

When Jubal originated the playing of the harp and the organ that he did, he either created or played musical instruments that obviously only produced instrumental music. As a member of the ungodly line of Cain, Jubal may have invented and likely played these instruments with wicked intent.

Our understanding of the actual nature of the instrumental music that he produced, however, depends entirely on the position that we take about whether instrumental music is inherently neutral or even moral.

Case 1: Instrumental Music is Inherently Neutral or Moral

Let us consider first what would have been true if we do hold to the inherent neutrality or morality of instrumental music. Holding the position that music itself without lyrics cannot be sinful requires that we also hold that no matter how wicked Jubal was and regardless of how wicked his intent was in his playing, it was impossible for him to produce any instrumental music that was in and of itself evil.

Because there was no way for him to play those instruments to produce instrumental music that was itself evil, all the instrumental music that he produced must have been either neutral or moral. Since his instruments, therefore, produced, only neutral or moral music, neither his instruments themselves nor the music they produced were evil.

In that case, even though Jubal would have been a wicked man who originated the playing of his instruments for a wicked purpose, he could not have accomplished his wicked intent solely through the intrinsic nature of the music that he played through his instruments. Any wicked activities for which he used his instruments, therefore, would have been wicked not because of the intrinsic nature of either the instruments or the music they produced; some other aspect of the activities had to be wicked for him to use those instruments for evil.

Because neither his instruments nor any of the music that they produced would have been capable of being evil, the use of those instruments that he may have made by godly people (especially many centuries later) would have posed no moral issues whatever. Even if David had used the same instrument that Jubal may have invented for his wicked purposes, there would have been no moral problems with his doing so because the instrument itself was not evil and it was incapable of producing any inherently evil instrumental music.

Case 2: Instrumental Music Can Be Sinful

What happens, however, if we hold that music itself without lyrics can be sinful? In this case, Jubal would have been able to produce instrumental music that was itself wicked.

He could then have accomplished his evil intent solely through playing those instruments. Would that therefore have made his instruments evil or their use by someone else wrong?

The only way that his instruments themselves could have been evil was if they were capable of only producing sinful instrumental music. For that to have been true, no matter what notes or combinations of notes he played or how he played them, the resulting instrumental music would always have had to have been sinful.

Of course, his creating such instruments was impossible because individual musical sounds or tones in and of themselves cannot be evil. We must conclude in this case, therefore, that his instruments were not inherently sinful and that they were inherently capable of producing both godly instrumental music and ungodly instrumental music.

Because his instruments were not inherently sinful and because they were capable of producing godly instrumental music, David’s use of one of those instruments for godly purposes could not have been inherently wrong.

In either case, therefore, David’s use of the harp that may have been invented by Jubal could not have been wrong based on the consideration of who may have invented it.

Does David’s Use of the Harp Possibly Invented by Jubal Justify CCM?

The above discussion shows that regardless of what position we take about the possibility of music itself without lyrics being sinful, David’s using a harp that Jubal possibly invented could not have been intrinsically wrong because the harp itself was not evil nor could it have been. This conclusion is true whether Jubal invented the harp or its playing or both as a wicked man with a wicked intent or as a wicked man with a humanly good intent.[2]

Is the same true for CCM? For the same to be true of CCM, it would have to be proven that music itself without lyrics could not be evil.

Conclusion

Brethren who wish to show that using CCM is legitimate cannot do it by pointing to David’s use of a harp that may have been invented by Jubal as a valid parallel to their use of CCM because the harp itself could not have been inherently evil even if Jubal’s intent for possibly making it, using it, or both was evil. Because the same is not true of the instrumental music used to create and play CCM, David’s use of the harp possibly invented by Jubal does not justify CCM.

 

[1] Most interpreters understand his being the father of those who handle the harp and the organ as signifying that he invented them. The verbs used in this verse, however, do not mean to invent, so it is unclear whether Jubal invented these instruments or not.

[2] Obviously, if Jubal was a good man, the same conclusion holds.

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

A Helpful Insight about Singing from How Hebrews 2:12 Uses Psalm 22:22

December 18, 2013

Whenever the NT uses the OT, we are given insight into how God wants us as NT believers to use the OT and profit from it. By the way it cites Psalm 22:22, Hebrews 2:12 provides a helpful insight concerning our understanding of biblical teaching about singing.

In Psalm 22, David writes,

“I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee” (22:22).

The Hebrew text for this verse reads:

  WTT אֲסַפְּרָ֣ה שִׁמְךָ֣ לְאֶחָ֑י בְּת֖וֹךְ קָהָ֣ל אֲהַלְלֶֽךָּ׃

The writer of Hebrews cites this text when he writes,

“Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee” (2:12)

Comparing these passages, we learn that the NT has “sing praise” where the OT has “praise.” The Holy Spirit thus reveals to us that Psalm 22:22 was actually a statement about singing and not just about praising God through ordinary speech.

This observation should teach us that we should not be dogmatic that other references in the Psalms, which are inspired song texts, to praising God necessarily mean just ordinary speaking praise to Him. As Hebrews 2:12 reveals, it is very possible that such statements also may mean singing praise to Him instead of just speaking it.

One text where this is especially likely is Psalm 35:18 because David uses in this verse the exact same form of the same verb that is rendered “praise” in Psalm 22:22 to speak again of God being praised among a congregation of people:

Psa 35:18 I will give thee thanks in the great congregation: I will praise thee among much people.

  WTT א֭וֹדְךָ בְּקָהָ֣ל רָ֑ב בְּעַ֖ם עָצ֣וּם אֲהַֽלְלֶֽךָּ׃

If not in any other place, we can at least be confident that Psalm 35:18 is also a reference to singing praise to God and not just speaking praise to Him.

When, therefore, we seek to study comprehensively biblical teaching about singing, we must include Psalm 22:22 and very likely also Psalm 35:18 as biblical texts about singing.

 

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Languages, Interpretation, Music
 permalink

Should Christians Not Heed What Secular Musicians and Music Experts Say concerning the Morality of Music?

December 14, 2013

A Christian recently advised me, “Don’t appeal to the authority of secular rappers or rock musicians: Appeal to Scripture.” He holds a view that many believers today hold about what sources of authoritative information are valid concerning the moral aspects of music. Is this view correct?

Two key Scripture passages answer this question by showing that both believers and unbelievers have validly assessed the shamefulness of people in various respects. The first passage records that both believers and unbelievers did so at a time when the sinfulness of God’s people even included their producing ungodly music.

Righteous Believers Validly Assessed the Ungodliness of Music Produced by Some of God’s People

The Israelites’ profound sinfulness in the Golden Calf incident included music that two righteous believing authorities recognized from a distance as being music unfitting for worship by God’s people:

Exo 32:17 And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp.

 18 And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear.

 19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

Although he was at a distance from the camp that did not allow him to know exactly what the people were doing, Joshua discerned that the composite[1] sound that they were producing was a rough-sounding noise of people who were wildly excited, a sound that apparently was quite similar to the noise produced by people engaged in (all-out?) combat. Moses, however, from the same distance that prevented knowing what the words being sung were, was able to discern accurately that the raucous and frenetic noise that these reveling people were producing was the noise of people who were singing.

Moses, therefore, was able to tell from a distance that these out-of-control people (Exod. 32:25) were wildly reveling people who were producing an ungodly sound that certainly was not the sound of Spirit-filled people singing godly music (cf. Eph. 5:18-19). Arriving at the camp, he saw that their reveling also included sensual dancing of such vulgarity that it (and the idol that he finally saw in person) incited him to righteous flaming anger (Exod. 32:19).

Moreover, we know that these people who were singing and dancing wildly were people who had partaken of meat offered to an idol (Exod. 32:6). Having partaken of that meat, these wildly singing and dancing people were people who were doing so after having come into direct contact with demons (1 Cor. 10:20).

These demon-influenced Israelites were thus engaged in an immoral “playing” (1 Cor. 10:7) while they were supposedly observing a “feast to the Lord” (Exod. 32:5). Although they may have thought that they were singing acceptably to the Lord, righteous Israelites who were not influenced by demons on this occasion validly assessed their great wickedness, including the ungodly sounding music that they were producing.

Both Joshua and Moses were able to discern the unfitting-for-divine-worship composite sound of their music from a distance that did not allow them to know at all what they were singing. Regardless of what the words were that they were actually singing, the sound of their singing from a distance was ungodly.

This passage, therefore, teaches us that righteous believers can make a valid assessment that music of people who are supposedly worshiping the Lord is ungodly by assessing the nature of the overall sound produced even by people who are singing words. As Joshua and Moses did, such valid assessments can be made without knowing what the lyrics are that the people are singing.

Even Ordinary Unbelievers Validly Assessed Their Shamefulness

Not only righteous believers, but also their unrighteous enemies validly assessed the great sinfulness of these uncontrolled revelers on this occasion:

Exo 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies.[2]

This text shows that Scripture records an instance when unbelievers could and did make valid moral assessments about unrighteous worship by God’s people (Exod. 32:17-19)! The people among the Israelites who engaged in the Golden Calf incident had became so openly sinful at this time that even their enemies were ashamed of them.

This passage is especially telling because it shows that a high-level leader among God’s own people sinned so egregiously on this occasion in how he allowed God’s people to get out of control that even the sinful enemies of God’s people plainly recognized that what they were doing was ungodly. Not only were they able to assess validly the immoral behavior of these people, but also they regarded their behavior to be shameful!

Moreover, the passage provides no indication that these who regarded the behavior of the Israelites as shameful at this time were expert authorities on various aspects of human morality. Rather, the passage shows that even ordinary unbelievers validly made these moral assessments about their unrighteous religious activities![3]

Apostolic Recognition That Unbelieving Experts Can Make Valid Moral Assessments

In agreement with Exodus 32, Titus 1 reveals that the apostle Paul held that unbelievers do have the ability to make valid moral assessments of unrighteous human behavior (of various types) by unbelievers (Titus 1:12). Moreover, Paul shows us that it is righteous for Christians to heed such assessments when they are made by unbelieving experts who confirm the believers’ own assessment of such unrighteous behavior (Titus 1:13; see this post for a full explanation of this key point).

Conclusion

Scripture shows that righteous believers can make valid assessments of purported worship of the Lord that is in reality ungodly behavior by believers whose religious activities include producing music that is ungodly (Exod. 32)! Amazingly, it even shows that such assessments of singing can be made without knowing what the lyrics are of such ungodly music.

Scripture also provides us with clear teaching that shows that unbelievers can make valid assessments of unrighteous human behavior both by God’s people (Exod. 32:25) and by other unbelievers (Titus 1:12). Moreover, it is right to heed and appropriately make use of such valid assessments (Titus 1:13).

Applying all this biblical data to the issues concerning music in our day, we learn that Scripture teaches us that Christians should heed the warnings of secular musicians and music experts who warn us about music that is immoral and unfitting for Christian worship (for example, see this brief testimony).

 

[1] Although the passage does not mention their playing any musical instruments, based on the available Scriptural data concerning human feasting (cf. Gen. 31:27; Exod. 15:20; Luke 15:22, 25; etc.), it is highly probable that they were. Either way, the term composite signifies the totality of the sound that they were producing, whether through singing alone or through both singing and playing.

[2] NAU Exo 32:25 Now when Moses saw that the people were out of control– for Aaron had let them get out of control to be a derision among their enemies–; NET Exo 32:25 Moses saw that the people were running wild, for Aaron had let them get completely out of control, causing derision from their enemies; NIV Exo 32:25 Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies; NKJ Exo 32:25 Now when Moses saw that the people were unrestrained (for Aaron had not restrained them, to their shame among their enemies); ESV Exo 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people had broken loose (for Aaron had let them break loose, to the derision of their enemies). What all these translators recognize is that the people became profoundly and openly sinful at this time.

[3] Although the passage does not elaborate at all who these enemies were or what the extent of their knowledge of the Israelites’ sinfulness on this occasion was, we can be certain that what they knew about the ungodly reveling of these Israelites caused them to be ashamed of them.

 

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exhortation, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

Do 1 Timothy 4:4-5 and Romans 14:14 Refute What Shai Linne Says They Do?

December 11, 2013

In his first rebuttal to Scott Aniol on the subject of “Christian rap,” Shai Linne asserts, “Scripture clearly refutes” the notion “that music, apart from lyrics, can be sinful in and of itself.” More fully, he writes:

You [Scott] said:

“Yes, I believe that music, apart from lyrics, can be sinful in and of itself.”

I wholeheartedly disagree and I believe Scripture clearly refutes that notion. A few relevant texts:

“For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.” (1 Timothy 4:4-5 )

“I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself…” (Romans 14:14)

Those are amazing statements coming from the Apostle Paul, a Jewish man who was familiar with the many old covenant dietary restrictions. The key phrase in Romans 14:14? “in itself”. Paul is saying that food doesn’t have inherent moral value. The heart of the one eating it determines how God views the act, not the food itself.

You yourself said, “God created the ‘stuff’ of music (sound, pitch, rhythm, timbre, etc.)”. Agreed. Music is simply the result of human beings arranging that “stuff” that God created. Can it be arranged with evil intent? Sure. And the person who does that will have to give an account for it. But no matter how evil a musician’s intentions, he doesn’t have the power to transform something that God created and called good into something inherently sinful. [1]

Is what Shai Linne asserts here a valid handling of these passages? Various considerations from Scripture combine to answer this question.

Does Paul Teach That Food Does Not Have Inherent Moral Value?

Concerning Romans 14:14, Shai asserts, “Paul is saying that food doesn’t have inherent moral value.” If that were what Paul is saying in Romans 14:14, then Paul would be contradicting himself because he explicitly says in the other passage that Shai quotes that everything that God has created is good: “For every creature of God is good” (1 Tim. 4:4).

Contrary to what Shai asserts, therefore, Paul teaches that food does have inherent moral value because what God has created as food for man is good. Neither 1 Timothy 4:4-5 nor Romans 14:14 teaches that food does not have inherent moral value.

Do 1 Timothy 4:4-5 and Romans 14:14 Support Shai’s Understanding of Music?

About music, Shai says, “Music is simply the result of human beings arranging that ‘stuff’ that God created. Can it be arranged with evil intent? Sure. And the person who does that will have to give an account for it.” With these statements, he acknowledges that people can arrange the ‘stuff’ of music with an evil intent and that they will have to answer to God for doing so.

He then, however, asserts, “But no matter how evil a musician’s intentions, he doesn’t have the power to transform something that God created and called good into something inherently sinful.” When he says this, Shai clearly is asserting that man cannot do something, but what exactly does he mean by what he says here?

If what he means by this statement were that the various elements (the musical “stuff”) that God created (such as individual musical tones) cannot themselves be transformed into something inherently sinful, that would be one thing. Because, however, he means that the resulting product of the human arrangement also cannot be inherently sinful, he is saying something far beyond what either of these passages is saying because neither passage directly addresses what happens when man alters or combines good things that God has made.

Can Man Create Something That Is Inherently Sinful from Something Good That God Created?

Because neither 1 Timothy 4:4-5 or Romans 14:14 actually does what Shai asserts, we have to look elsewhere in Scripture to see if it teaches anywhere one way or the other whether man can take something good that God has created and make something that is in and of itself evil. Deuteronomy 9 provides revelation that addresses this matter explicitly and decisively.

In Deuteronomy 9:1-7, Moses reminds the Israelites of their previous wickedness in the wilderness. He then rehearses their exceeding wickedness in the Golden Calf incident (Deut. 9:8-21).

Moses notes multiple times in this passage that they sinned by making a molten image (Deut. 9:12, 16, 21): They quickly “turned aside out of the way” that God had commanded and “made them a molten image” (Deut. 9:12). They “sinned against the Lord [their] God” and “made . . . a molded calf” (Deut. 9:16; cf. Exod. 32:31).

When he speaks for the third time in the passage about the calf that they made, he says,

Deu 9:21 And I took your sin, the calf which ye had made, and burnt it with fire, and stamped it, and ground it very small, even until it was as small as dust: and I cast the dust thereof into the brook that descended out of the mount.

The exact wording of this third reference to their making the calf is striking: “your sin, the calf which ye had made.” Saying this, Moses puts “the calf which ye had made” in apposition to “your sin.”

Moses thus referred to the calf that they made as their “sin”! He thus said that the calf was itself sinful.[2]

It was not just their evil intent for the calf or their evil use of it that was sinful—the calf itself was a sinful object! These people took gold, an inherently good and highly valuable substance that God created (cf. Gen. 2:12), and made an object out of it that was in and of itself sinful.

Although the gold itself did not become inherently sinful, the golden calf was a manmade fashioning of that gold into something that was inherently sinful! Based on what Scripture says about what man did with gold on this occasion, we understand that this passage refutes the basic principle underlying what Shai asserts is true about the musical “stuff” that God created: “But no matter how evil a musician’s intentions, he doesn’t have the power to transform something that God created and called good into something inherently sinful.”

Discussion

As a key basis for his support of “Christian rap,” Shai Linne asserts that humans cannot take something inherently good that God has created and make something out of it that is in and of itself sinful. Deuteronomy 9:21 refutes this assertion by showing that man did take something inherently good that God created and make it into something that was inherently sinful.

It is important to note that the gold that they made the calf from was from their earrings (Exod. 32:2-3), and we have no indication that their possessing and using gold that had been fashioned into rings to be worn in their ears was sinful. When they took the gold of those earrings, combined it, and molded it into the calf, however, the resulting object that they made for an evil purpose was wicked.

On the one hand, man’s use of his creative powers to make something out of the gold (the earrings) was not sinful. On the other hand, when they through “art and man’s device” (Acts 17:29) made the golden calf, they sinned by making an object that was in and of itself sinful (Deut. 9:21).

Moreover, the golden calf could not be “redeemed.” In spite of the fact that the gold that constituted it was a precious good metal that God had made as good, the golden calf that had been made for and used for a wicked purpose had to be obliterated (Deut. 9:21).

Conclusion

Neither 1 Timothy 4:4-5 nor Romans 14:14 supports the view that man cannot take musical elements and arrange them to make instrumental music that is inherently sinful. Scripture does not “clearly refute” the view “that music, apart from lyrics, can be sinful in and of itself.”

In fact, Deuteronomy 9:21 shows that Scripture provides a clear basis for saying that human beings can take good things that God has made and create something out of them that is inherently sinful.[3] Applying this principle to what many biblical passages reveal about music provides believers with ample justification to say that instrumental music made for and used for wicked purposes is inherently wicked music.


[1] See the full rebuttal by Shai Linne here.

[2] Multiple translations confirm this understanding: “I took your sinful thing, the calf which you had made” (NAU); “As for your sinful thing that you had made, the calf” (NET); “Also I took that sinful thing of yours, the calf you had made” (NIV); “Then I took the sinful thing, the calf that you had made” (ESV); I took the sinful calf you had made” (CSB).

[3] For another argument that establishes the same point see this post.

 

 

 

Copyright © 2011-2025 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Theology
 permalink