Archives For Theology

Who Needs to Forgive Someone Who Has Sinned As Josh Duggar Has?

May 30, 2015

Many people have written recently about the situation involving the aftermath of the immoral acts that Josh Duggar committed when he was a young teenager. Some have asserted that the only people who need to forgive him for what he has done are his victims. An examination of Pauline teaching in First and Second Corinthians does not support this assertion.

An Initially Mishandled Case of an Immoral Man in the Church at Corinth

Paul sternly challenged the Corinthians about their failure to discipline a man in their church who had committed incest with his father’s wife (1 Cor. 5). Using his apostolic authority, Paul judged this immoral man (1 Cor. 5:3-5) and instructed the Corinthians to judge him as well by removing him from among themselves (1 Cor. 5:7, 12, 13).

The Subsequent Mishandling of This Case

Based on what Paul later wrote to the Corinthians (2 Cor. 2:1-11), we learn that the Corinthians at some point after receiving Paul’s challenge corrected their initial mishandling of the case involving this immoral man by properly punishing him (“this punishment, which was inflicted of many,” 2 Cor. 2:6). We also learn, however, that they subsequently mishandled this case by not properly forgiving and comforting him (2 Cor. 2:7) after he repented.

Using again his apostolic authority, Paul exhorted the Corinthians to correct their subsequent mishandling of this case by confirming their love toward him (2 Cor. 2:8). Paul explained that their obedience to this directive about their forgiving him was directly tied to his forgiving him for their sakes “in the person of Christ” (2 Cor. 9-10).

Who Needs to Forgive Josh Duggar?

Paul’s teaching to the Corinthians about their dealings with this horrible case of incest among themselves shows that it was not true that the only people who needed to forgive this immoral man for what he had done was the one with whom he had committed immorality. According to this divine revelation, the entire church at Corinth needed to forgive this man, as also Paul did.

Applying this teaching to the current situation with Josh Duggar, we understand that other believers besides his victims must also forgive and comfort Josh Duggar. They must also confirm their love toward him.

A failure to do so puts him at risk of being “swallowed up with overmuch sorrow” (2 Cor. 2:7). It also puts all believers at risk of Satan’s gaining an advantage of us (2 Cor. 2:11).

Conclusion

Certainly, what Josh Duggar did when he was a young teenager was reprehensible, and we must not condone his actions in any way. Applying Pauline teaching about forgiveness in First and Second Corinthians to his case does not lessen the need for proper care of those whom he victimized.

Having said that, based on what I have read being said by some people concerning forgiving Josh Duggar, it is vital that we do heed what Scripture teaches about forgiveness and how that teaching applies to the issue of who should forgive him. It is not true that the only people who need to forgive him are the ones whom he victimized—other believers must also forgive him, comfort him, and confirm their love toward him.

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

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

On the Transmission of Information from Adam to Abraham

May 25, 2015

Genealogical information about our families is something that probably greatly interests most of us. Based on a careful analysis and correlation of the genealogical information provided in Genesis 5 and 11, we learn some vital information through our determining which men were contemporaries among our first forefathers from Adam to Abraham and for how long.

Contemporaries from Adam to Noah

Adam and Methuselah were contemporaries for 243 years (687-930 AA).1 Adam and Lamech were contemporaries for 56 years (874-930 AA). Both Methuselah and Lamech, therefore, had extensive opportunities to get eyewitness information from Adam about what took place after he was created!

Methuselah and Lamech were contemporaries for 777 years (874-1651 AA). If only one of these men ever actually took the opportunity to visit with Adam and hear as much as they could from him, he would have had a vast amount of time to share it with the other.

Noah and Methuselah were contemporaries for 600 years (1056-1656 AA). Noah and Lamech were contemporaries for 595 years (1056-1651 AA). Noah thus had more than half a millennium to meet with either Methuselah or Lamech or both and get information from them that they had gotten directly from Adam.

Methuselah became the oldest man alive when Jared died in 1422 AA at the age of 962. For the next 234 years (1422-1656 AA), Methuselah was the oldest man alive. When Methuselah died in 1656 AA, which was also the year the Flood took place, Noah became the oldest man alive (600 years of age).

Contemporaries from Noah to Abraham

After the Flood, Noah was the oldest man alive for the last 350 years of his life (1656-2006 AA), and his sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth were the next oldest men living during their remaining lifetimes.

From 1878-1996 AA, Noah, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, and Terah were all contemporaries. After Peleg died in 1996 AA, Nahor died in 1997 AA.

From 1997 until the death of Noah in 2006 AA, Noah, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, Eber, Reu, Serug, and Terah were contemporaries. After Abraham was born in 2008 AA, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, Eber, Reu, Serug, Terah, and Abraham were contemporaries for 18 years (until Reu died in 2026 AA)!

Eber was still alive when Abraham died in 2183 AA.

Direct Transmission of Eyewitness Information from Adam to Abraham

Based on the preceding analysis, we learn that Noah readily could have gotten information that was received directly from Adam via either Methuselah or Lamech or both. In turn, Noah would have had opportunities to transmit that information personally to at least one of his sons from each of the nine generations after him!

Direct transmission of eyewitness information from Adam to Abraham through Noah and either Methuselah or Lamech or both and then through any one or more of 7 descendants of Noah (Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, Eber, Reu, Serug, Terah) thus was entirely possible!

Given the immense importance of such information, and the great value that we as human beings place on meeting our forefathers at least once while they are living and having them tell us about their lives, we can be almost certain that direct transmission of vital eyewitness information took place from Adam to Methuselah and Lamech to Noah to Terah to Abraham!

 

1 AA means “after Adam” and denotes the number of years after the creation of Adam.

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

In Exposition, Theology
 permalink

Did God Curse Adam and Eve After They Fell?

May 16, 2015

Genesis 3 records God’s judgments upon the serpent, Adam, and Eve for their roles and actions that led to the Fall of Adam and Eve. Genesis 4 then records how God judged Cain for murdering his brother Abel.

In rendering these judgments, Scripture records that God used the word “cursed” in the following statements in Genesis 3 and 4:

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

Gen 4:11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;

These verses show that God cursed the serpent and He cursed Cain, but Scripture does not say (at least directly) in Genesis 3 that God cursed Adam (or Eve)—God told Adam that the ground, and not he (or Eve), was cursed for his sake (Gen. 3:17). Does the fact that Scripture does not directly say here that God cursed Adam and Eve mean that He in fact did not curse them after they fell?

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

In Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

How 2 Kings 10:29-33 Provides Vital Instruction for Fundamentalists

May 10, 2015

Some fundamentalists who rightly insist on the importance of biblical separation have allowed certain aspects of that teaching to govern their thinking in a way that causes them not to be fully God-like in their perspectives about and dealings with those from whom they separate. Second Kings 10:29-33 provides vital instruction to all believers that reveals what their perspectives and actions should be in such situations.

The Mixed Record of the Life of King Jehu

God anointed Jehu to be king over Israel and commanded him to execute God’s vengeance on the house of Ahab (2 Kings 9:6-10). The author of Second Kings chronicles at length how Jehu faithfully rendered that judgment on Ahab (2 Kings 9:11-10:17).

Jehu then “destroyed Baal out of Israel” (2 Kings 10:18-28). He displayed incredible zeal for God in eradicating the worship of Baal in this manner.

Remarkably, however, Scripture then records that Jehu did not depart from the sins of Jereboam (2 Kings 10:29, 31)! The biblical record of the life of King Jehu thus is a mixed record detailing the life of one who was very zealous for God in certain respects but also very sinful in other respects.

God’s Commendation of Certain Actions of Jehu in spite of Jehu’s Great Wickedness in Other Respects

Despite Jehu’s great sinfulness in continuing in the sins of Jereboam, Scripture records that God yet commended (and rewarded) him for the right things that he had done:

2Ki 10:30 And the LORD said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.

This remarkable commendation from God is especially noteworthy because it is sandwiched between two statements of the great sinfulness of Jehu (2 Kings 10:29, 31) and is followed by the record of how God judged Israel for its continuing sinfulness (2 Kings 10:32-33).

How God Instructs Fundamentalists through 2 Kings 10:29-33 

The biblical record of the mixed nature of Jehu’s life provides vital instruction to believers in at least two important ways. On the one hand, although Jehu had done well in serving God in certain respects, God yet recorded how Jehu was very sinful in other respects.

God also chastened him and his nation for their sinfulness. Fundamentalists should thus learn that it is God-like to point out the sinfulness of those from whom they separate—even if those from whom they separate are greatly serving God in some respects.

On the other hand, however, even though Jehu was horrifically sinful in following in the sins of Jeroboam, God still commended Jehu for what he had done well and even rewarded him for his faithfulness in doing what God had commissioned him to do concerning the house of Ahab. Fundamentalists should learn from this facet of the record of Jehu’s life that being God-like in our dealings with those we separate from also includes properly commending them for the right things that they have done in their service for God.

Conclusion

In separating from other believers, fundamentalist must be God-like by pointing out the great sinfulness of those believers and by properly commending them for whatever true good they have done for the cause of Christ. Doing so, fundamentalists will be God-like, just as the record of God’s dealings with Jehu teaches.1

 

1 They will also be like Christ, who both called attention to the sinfulness of those who were in His churches and commended them for whatever good aspects there were to their lives (Rev. 2-3).

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

In Discipleship, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

What Jesus Wants Repeatedly Emphasized to His People in His Churches

April 21, 2015

Imagine that you go to church on a Sunday or Wednesday and hear that Jesus is going to come to your church and preach a week of meetings at your church. If that were to happen, what do you think Jesus would repeatedly emphasize in His week of meetings?

Of course, Jesus is not Himself going to come preach at any church, but we can know something about what Jesus wants emphasized in messages in His churches by noting what He repeatedly talks about in the seven letters to the seven churches in Revelation 2-3. In messages to three of the seven churches, Jesus spoke six times about a key figure that is active in Christian churches:

Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Rev 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Rev 2:24 But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden.

Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Based on this biblical data, we can be confident that Jesus wants preachers and teachers in His churches continually to make His people mindful of the nefarious activities of Satan! Let us learn from these passages that we must keep this emphasis before God’s people continually.

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

In Exhortation, Preaching, Theology
 permalink

A Key Distinction That Many Believers May Be Missing

April 9, 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. When Paul the Apostle lists various works of the flesh, he distinguishes between idolatry (Gal. 5:19) and witchcraft/sorcery (Gal. 5:20):

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In CCM, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

A Shocking Omission of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in Grudem’s Systematic Theology

April 3, 2015

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

I. Explanation of the Facts Concerning Salvation

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

III. A Promise of Forgiveness and Eternal Life

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Christian Books, Gospel, Theology
 permalink

Are Some People Better Than Others Are?

March 30, 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

How to Apply Romans 14:1-15:13 Properly to the Debates about Christian Music: Part I

March 21, 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

In CCM, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

How “Inventors of Evil Things” (Rom. 1:30) Applies to Our Assessment of Certain Musical Styles

March 19, 2015

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In CCM, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink