Comments on: Can Rap be Christian? Evaluating Hip Hop http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop Just another WordPress weblog Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:34:27 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Tim S. http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1407 Tim S. Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:38:40 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1407 It is so interesting to me how folks can work themselves up into claiming that someone has said something that hasn't been said. Job says, ". . . claiming that traditional western worship is the product of God’s special grace is historically untenable. . . ." But I don't think that he can point to a single instance where someone has claimed that western worship is the product of God's special grace on this page. Job, while the history you have provided is interesting, rap's history and cultural roots are not at the crux of this argument. What is at the core of the argument is the bioacoustic meaning of its sound (apart from any and all lyrics). No one is suggesting that rap be eliminated from worship because it comes from such and such a cultural background. What Scott said in his article was, ". . . the unavoidable conclusion is that rap music, because of what it inherently communicates, is incompatible with the Christian Gospel. It expresses sentiments that contradict the very message that we love." "Because of what it inherently communicates." This phrase refers to the sound of rap apart from lyrics. It is the sound of rap that is incongruent with the affects of the Gospel. It is so interesting to me how folks can work themselves up into claiming that someone has said something that hasn’t been said. Job says, “. . . claiming that traditional western worship is the product of God’s special grace is historically untenable. . . .” But I don’t think that he can point to a single instance where someone has claimed that western worship is the product of God’s special grace on this page.

Job, while the history you have provided is interesting, rap’s history and cultural roots are not at the crux of this argument. What is at the core of the argument is the bioacoustic meaning of its sound (apart from any and all lyrics). No one is suggesting that rap be eliminated from worship because it comes from such and such a cultural background. What Scott said in his article was, “. . . the unavoidable conclusion is that rap music, because of what it inherently communicates, is incompatible with the Christian Gospel. It expresses sentiments that contradict the very message that we love.”

“Because of what it inherently communicates.” This phrase refers to the sound of rap apart from lyrics. It is the sound of rap that is incongruent with the affects of the Gospel.

]]> By: Job http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1406 Job Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:49:07 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1406 Pardon me, but rap music was created in the west, in America. It is part and parcel of the American experience, and therefore western culture. Allow me to also say that rap music's early beginnings was relatively benign in a sense. Its subject matter was indistinguishable from other forms of secular music i.e. partying and romance. However, unlike jazz, country, bluegrass, and rock music (all of which had similar origins) rap music went on its downward spiral because "respectable people" wanted nothing to do with it because it was so associated with the black underclass. As a matter of fact, the biggest criticism of rap music originally came from the black middle and upper classes, who felt that the music and culture threatened their attempts to integrate with a still largely hostile white American mainstream (yes, we are talking about a time when not a few churches did not even allow blacks to join). So, where mainstream and corporate America "tamed" other forms of secular music, rap music was dominated by people on the margins of society: criminals and political radicals. Had mainstream America and/or the black upper class not taken a hostile position towards rap music in its more benign days, the "gangsta" genre would have never flourished, as the "gangsta" element in rap music came along rather late, after the medium had been popular for nearly ten years, and when it did, even most rap music fans hated it for ethical and aesthetic reasons. (Ironically, gangsta rap won out over its critics only because it significantly increased the number of rap fans. Before "gangsta" rap, the number of rap fans were small, and there were few major hit albums by mainstream standards. It was gangsta rap that created the big sellers of the genre, and attracted fans in waves that vastly outnumbered fans of the original less evil rap music.) So, rap music is nothing more than what many forms of secular music and entertainment would have developed into had they not been tamed by corporate America for the purposes of mass marketing to mainstream middle class consumers. In this respect, it is what other forms of music might have been. (For example, where country music is now considered "all American music" by "traditional values conservatives", including Christians, the truth is that it was once the "rap music" of underclass whites, and dealt heavily with alcohol, sexual immorality, violence, anger, rage, crime, frustration etc.) In that context, singling out rap music when other genres are merely sanitized (and again, by corporate America for financial reasons) versions of the same is myopic and unfair. To be consistent historically, culturally and spiritually, you would have to reject all music save traditional forms that originated in the church. Except ... even that is problematic. Though Jamaican forms were very influential in its development, rap music nonetheless the descendant of disco. Disco is the descendant of R&B music. R&B music is the descendant of soul music. And soul music has long been acknowledged to have been black gospel music with secular lyrics. (Incidentally, rock and roll music underwent a similar progression. Only jazz has always been secular.) Before you take the convenient escape "but that is black culture, which is not truly western per se, but more the product of blacks who were never truly part of western culture due to slavery and Jim Crow." Not only is that a shockingly liberal statement, a justification for affirmative action if there ever was one, the easy way out still often obscures the truth. The reason is that even many "traditional western" forms of Christian music either had pagan origins, or were developed by the pagan Roman Catholic cult. Christianity was born in the near east, not the west. It merely spread from the ancient near eastern culture to the west, first the Roman Empire and then to the tribal areas (Angles, Saxons, Celts, Franks, Danes, Vikings, Germanic tribes, etc.) Of course, the Roman Empire was pagan, and the tribal European areas even more so (or perhaps not so much pagan as animist, as tribes generally are). Now by this time, anything pertaining to the original culture of Christianity - which was Jewish and therefore Oriental - had been long cast off. Instead, the Roman Empire Christians simply added the new faith to their pre-existing pagan culture, and the European tribal Christians did the same. So, what happened was that the pagan Greco-Roman culture and the animist tribal European cultures were "Christianized." Prior to Constantine, it can only be said that Christianity itself had been "Hellenized" because of the purging of Jewish influences. But after Constantine, it must be said that European pagan and animist culture was "Christianized" because that was the way of "Christendom", which was the conscious mixing of not only church and state, but church and culture, with any concept of separation between the church and the world gone. Anything that went on in a "Christian nation" was thus deemed "Christian", and a nation (or tribe) was considered "Christian" upon either its conquest or the "conversion" of its rulers (who often "converted" in the face of inevitable conquest). But the idea that the Roman Catholic Church went about the business of reforming the culture in these pagan and tribal areas is folly. Instead, the Roman Catholic Church simply conformed itself to the existing cultural, political, economic, and yes religious ideas, and only added to it churches and priests. An example: rather than doing anything to transform it, the Catholic Church was one of the most powerful institutions that kept the dreadfully oppressive feudal system in place, and not only that but the Catholic Church benefited from the evils of feudalism greatly. So, claiming that traditional western worship is the product of God's special grace is historically untenable, because it presumes that the theology of Eusebius - that it was God's will to merge Christianity with pagan/animist state and culture - was correct. If that is the position, then it must be asserted as a matter of theology that God for some reason prefers European paganism and animism to African, Middle Eastern and Asian versions of the same. Even better, since - again - black Americans are westerners and rap music was created in and by western culture and is as much a part of it as Mozart symphonies and baroque piano, then it asserts that God prefers white western culture to black western culture. Specifically, it asserts that God prefers the affluent, well educated white westerners who created and sponsored classical music and art (i.e. "Christian" landed nobles who paid large sums to support and commission composers and sculptors while the serfs and proles around them were starving to death!) to the poor, black inner city denizens whose culture developed in isolated neglect due to slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and the Great Society. Of course, one does not need to be a liberation theologist to realize that such is an inversion of the words of Jesus Christ in Luke 6:20, which is "Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God." Please consider this before you consider comparing ChurchSalt's use of Christian rap music in evangelism to "nudity, gambling, drinking." At the very least, be consistent and apply the same standard to traditional and high church worship components that can be directly traced to the paganism of the Roman Empire or the animism of the European tribes. Thank you. Pardon me, but rap music was created in the west, in America. It is part and parcel of the American experience, and therefore western culture.

Allow me to also say that rap music’s early beginnings was relatively benign in a sense. Its subject matter was indistinguishable from other forms of secular music i.e. partying and romance. However, unlike jazz, country, bluegrass, and rock music (all of which had similar origins) rap music went on its downward spiral because “respectable people” wanted nothing to do with it because it was so associated with the black underclass. As a matter of fact, the biggest criticism of rap music originally came from the black middle and upper classes, who felt that the music and culture threatened their attempts to integrate with a still largely hostile white American mainstream (yes, we are talking about a time when not a few churches did not even allow blacks to join). So, where mainstream and corporate America “tamed” other forms of secular music, rap music was dominated by people on the margins of society: criminals and political radicals. Had mainstream America and/or the black upper class not taken a hostile position towards rap music in its more benign days, the “gangsta” genre would have never flourished, as the “gangsta” element in rap music came along rather late, after the medium had been popular for nearly ten years, and when it did, even most rap music fans hated it for ethical and aesthetic reasons. (Ironically, gangsta rap won out over its critics only because it significantly increased the number of rap fans. Before “gangsta” rap, the number of rap fans were small, and there were few major hit albums by mainstream standards. It was gangsta rap that created the big sellers of the genre, and attracted fans in waves that vastly outnumbered fans of the original less evil rap music.)

So, rap music is nothing more than what many forms of secular music and entertainment would have developed into had they not been tamed by corporate America for the purposes of mass marketing to mainstream middle class consumers. In this respect, it is what other forms of music might have been. (For example, where country music is now considered “all American music” by “traditional values conservatives”, including Christians, the truth is that it was once the “rap music” of underclass whites, and dealt heavily with alcohol, sexual immorality, violence, anger, rage, crime, frustration etc.)

In that context, singling out rap music when other genres are merely sanitized (and again, by corporate America for financial reasons) versions of the same is myopic and unfair. To be consistent historically, culturally and spiritually, you would have to reject all music save traditional forms that originated in the church.

Except … even that is problematic. Though Jamaican forms were very influential in its development, rap music nonetheless the descendant of disco. Disco is the descendant of R&B music. R&B music is the descendant of soul music. And soul music has long been acknowledged to have been black gospel music with secular lyrics. (Incidentally, rock and roll music underwent a similar progression. Only jazz has always been secular.)

Before you take the convenient escape “but that is black culture, which is not truly western per se, but more the product of blacks who were never truly part of western culture due to slavery and Jim Crow.” Not only is that a shockingly liberal statement, a justification for affirmative action if there ever was one, the easy way out still often obscures the truth.

The reason is that even many “traditional western” forms of Christian music either had pagan origins, or were developed by the pagan Roman Catholic cult. Christianity was born in the near east, not the west. It merely spread from the ancient near eastern culture to the west, first the Roman Empire and then to the tribal areas (Angles, Saxons, Celts, Franks, Danes, Vikings, Germanic tribes, etc.) Of course, the Roman Empire was pagan, and the tribal European areas even more so (or perhaps not so much pagan as animist, as tribes generally are). Now by this time, anything pertaining to the original culture of Christianity – which was Jewish and therefore Oriental – had been long cast off. Instead, the Roman Empire Christians simply added the new faith to their pre-existing pagan culture, and the European tribal Christians did the same.

So, what happened was that the pagan Greco-Roman culture and the animist tribal European cultures were “Christianized.” Prior to Constantine, it can only be said that Christianity itself had been “Hellenized” because of the purging of Jewish influences. But after Constantine, it must be said that European pagan and animist culture was “Christianized” because that was the way of “Christendom”, which was the conscious mixing of not only church and state, but church and culture, with any concept of separation between the church and the world gone. Anything that went on in a “Christian nation” was thus deemed “Christian”, and a nation (or tribe) was considered “Christian” upon either its conquest or the “conversion” of its rulers (who often “converted” in the face of inevitable conquest). But the idea that the Roman Catholic Church went about the business of reforming the culture in these pagan and tribal areas is folly. Instead, the Roman Catholic Church simply conformed itself to the existing cultural, political, economic, and yes religious ideas, and only added to it churches and priests. An example: rather than doing anything to transform it, the Catholic Church was one of the most powerful institutions that kept the dreadfully oppressive feudal system in place, and not only that but the Catholic Church benefited from the evils of feudalism greatly.

So, claiming that traditional western worship is the product of God’s special grace is historically untenable, because it presumes that the theology of Eusebius – that it was God’s will to merge Christianity with pagan/animist state and culture – was correct. If that is the position, then it must be asserted as a matter of theology that God for some reason prefers European paganism and animism to African, Middle Eastern and Asian versions of the same. Even better, since – again – black Americans are westerners and rap music was created in and by western culture and is as much a part of it as Mozart symphonies and baroque piano, then it asserts that God prefers white western culture to black western culture.

Specifically, it asserts that God prefers the affluent, well educated white westerners who created and sponsored classical music and art (i.e. “Christian” landed nobles who paid large sums to support and commission composers and sculptors while the serfs and proles around them were starving to death!) to the poor, black inner city denizens whose culture developed in isolated neglect due to slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and the Great Society. Of course, one does not need to be a liberation theologist to realize that such is an inversion of the words of Jesus Christ in Luke 6:20, which is “Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.”

Please consider this before you consider comparing ChurchSalt’s use of Christian rap music in evangelism to “nudity, gambling, drinking.” At the very least, be consistent and apply the same standard to traditional and high church worship components that can be directly traced to the paganism of the Roman Empire or the animism of the European tribes. Thank you.

]]> By: Tom http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1405 Tom Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:41:11 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1405 Hi Everyone, Glad the site is back up. Tim, Thank you for responding to the question regarding Western music development and how one would judge non-Western tonality. You make a very important statement when you say "A by-product of this is that believers will be edified. The purpose of singing during worship is not as evangelism or to entertain. Nowhere in Scripture does the Lord say that we should use music to evangelize. That doesn’t mean that He won’t/can’t use it, but again, He doesn’t promise it, command it, or model it in Scripture" in your November 23 post to Jeremy. We must all remember that the context of this discussion is the appropriate use of music in worship services attended by believers. Maybe we have hijacked what God intended as believer's worship and turned it into outreach for unbelievers. Does it really come down to purpose? If one distinguishes between appropriate music for worshiping believers and appropriate music for evangelizing unbelievers, is there really a difference between the two? If so, what are the rationale for such a difference and, more importantly, what are the biblical guidelines for the appropriateness of each? Doesn't it all come down to mirroring the character, worth, and work of God, for BOTH purposes? Now we are back to the initial question, "Can Rap Mirror God?" Hi Everyone, Glad the site is back up.

Tim, Thank you for responding to the question regarding Western music development and how one would judge non-Western tonality.

You make a very important statement when you say “A by-product of this is that believers will be edified. The purpose of singing during worship is not as evangelism or to entertain. Nowhere in Scripture does the Lord say that we should use music to evangelize. That doesn’t mean that He won’t/can’t use it, but again, He doesn’t promise it, command it, or model it in Scripture” in your November 23 post to Jeremy. We must all remember that the context of this discussion is the appropriate use of music in worship services attended by believers. Maybe we have hijacked what God intended as believer’s worship and turned it into outreach for unbelievers. Does it really come down to purpose? If one distinguishes between appropriate music for worshiping believers and appropriate music for evangelizing unbelievers, is there really a difference between the two? If so, what are the rationale for such a difference and, more importantly, what are the biblical guidelines for the appropriateness of each? Doesn’t it all come down to mirroring the character, worth, and work of God, for BOTH purposes? Now we are back to the initial question, “Can Rap Mirror God?”

]]> By: Tim S. http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1404 Tim S. Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:36:04 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1404 Here's a brief example of an associative response to music in Chuck Colson's message from November 24. http://www.breakpoint.org/commentaries/13594-god-with-us He describes his associative response to a familiar Christmas tune that has nothing to do with the sound constructs inherent in the music itself. Rather, this particular association is based on a word from the carol and his memory of a small boy. Associative responses to music can be as varied as individuals. But because they are based on an individual's own associations with the music, they cannot be the basis on which we choose music for worship. Rather, we should examine the sound constructs of the music itself to determine its inherent affective content. Appropriating music with sound constructs that communicate anything and everything and attaching gospel lyrics is not the solution. Here’s a brief example of an associative response to music in Chuck Colson’s message from November 24.

http://www.breakpoint.org/commentaries/13594-god-with-us

He describes his associative response to a familiar Christmas tune that has nothing to do with the sound constructs inherent in the music itself. Rather, this particular association is based on a word from the carol and his memory of a small boy.

Associative responses to music can be as varied as individuals. But because they are based on an individual’s own associations with the music, they cannot be the basis on which we choose music for worship. Rather, we should examine the sound constructs of the music itself to determine its inherent affective content. Appropriating music with sound constructs that communicate anything and everything and attaching gospel lyrics is not the solution.

]]> By: Tim S. http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1402 Tim S. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:15:33 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1402 Dear Jeremy, Let me begin by stating emphatically that there's no hostility at all! I apologize if I gave that impression. Sometimes I'm just blunt, but not hostile! So forgive my bluntness. Let me also thank you for your tone and honesty in discussing this matter. I've not taken anything you've said to be disrespectful. I think you bring up very good points. The worship I am speaking of is corporate worship. Corporate worship is the gathering of God's elect as a body to offer praise (both sung and spoken), thanksgiving, confession of sin, prayer, to hear His word read and preached, and to bring tithes and offerings. Though the Lord may use worship evangelistically, it is designed by God for His people to praise Him for what He has done for them through Christ, and not as evangelism (I Cor 14:24). I believe the purpose of evangelism is worship, not that the purpose of worship is evangelism. Music is a commanded element of worship to be used by God's people as they offer their praise and prayers to God; singing is directed to God and is for God. Here's a brief list of biblical reasons why God wants us to sing. I didn't include citations for reasons of length, but the following are all from Scripture. Because he is highly exalted. To tell of his wonderful acts. To proclaim his salvation day after day. Because of the joy we have in his refuge. Because he has been good to me. To exalt him and praise his might. Because he is our King and Lord. Because he is our fortress and our refuge we sing of his strength and love. Because he is King of all the earth. Because he is our help. To sing the glory of his name and make his praise glorious. To make his faithfulness known through all generations. Because he makes us glad by his deeds, I sing for joy at the works of his hands. Because he has done marvelous things; his right hand and his holy arm have worked salvation for him. Because all of his commands are righteous. Because the glory of the Lord is great. To celebrate his abundant goodness and joyfully sing of his righteousness. We are to sing to the Lord all our lives; as long as we live. Out of thanksgiving. To let it be known to all the world that he has done glorious things. Because he saves me. Because he has redeemed Jacob and displays his glory in Israel. Because he rescues the life of the needy from the hands of the wicked. To give us a spirit of unity among ourselves as we follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth we may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. To let the word of Christ dwell in us richly with gratitude in our hearts. To declare his name in the presence of the congregation. A by-product of this is that believers will be edified. The purpose of singing during worship is not as evangelism or to entertain. Nowhere in Scripture does the Lord say that we should use music to evangelize. That doesn't mean that He won't/can't use it, but again, He doesn't promise it, command it, or model it in Scripture. "But are the same emotions triggered in me that are in triggered in you when we listen to Bach and Mozart?" Naturally, not everyone will have the same emotional response to a piece by Bach or Mozart. But if you've followed my reasoning in previous posts, you will see that the reasons for this can be many. The most common reason is that listeners are capable of bringing their own biases to a listening experience, resulting in associative emotional responses. These are not responses triggered by the sound cues from the composer/performer (as described previously in the bioacoustic model), but rather individual responses brought to the listening experience by the listener. I am arguing that this highly individualistic associative model cannot be the model by which we choose music for worship since it is dependent on the individual rather than the music itself. Though individuals may have radically different reactions to any given music because of these associative models of communication, the church must choose music for worship that is based not on this chaotic, individualistic model. Rather, it must choose music based on the objective and natural sound characteristics of the music itself. I have also previously argued that if you're unable to hear the natural musical cues in the sound of music - those that suggest the motion that links to our emotions - then you may well be desensitized to the sounds because of your regular musical diet. In your honesty above, you admit as much, saying, "And maybe I am rebelling against this argument because I listen to too much rap/hip hop, who knows." It's a bit like eating hot sauce on all your food for years and then being unable to taste the natural flavor of a food when it doesn't have hot sauce (which for the purpose of this analogy is the backbeat found in all pop/rock music). The sound constructs of rap are very uniform. That's what makes it recognizable as rap. It's very difficult for those who listen to such a steady diet of a music like rap, with such uniform and immediately accessible sound constructs, to disengage from their diet to hear music that emphasizes other elements of the sound, such as melody or harmony. There is a desensitization process that occurs when drums accenting beats 2 and 4 are the primary sound in all or most of the music you listen to. I believe the sound of the music should be composed by skilled composers to communicate the affects of the texts. The affect of the text should therefore determine the sound constructs/style of the music. When these texts contain Gospel truths, and the composer has done his job well in correlating the music to the affect of the text, the human heart is taught well how to feel about the propositional content of the text. (Remember that Joshua and Moses first heard the *sound* of idolatry before they saw the idolatrous behavior. Ex. 32:17-18) Before writing this, I listened another time to Shai Linne's "The Greatest Story Ever Told." I first listened to it in another room, where, although I could hear all the sounds, the words were not distinguishable. I'm sorry, Jeremy, but the sound characteristics of this music are as I said: the syncopation of the backbeat is dominant and driving the affect, Shai Linne's voice is hypnotically and repetitively monotone and loud, and toward the end his voice gets even louder, suggesting increasing anger in the context of the backbeat and the monotone. His voice sounds like the voice of someone yelling at someone else in anger. When I listen more specifically to the content of the words, I am struck even more by the incongruity of the text with the sound. The sound of his voice suggests that he is angry with someone and yelling at them. Additionally, the inflections he uses for the text are not natural; they do damage to the intelligibility of the words, making comprehension much more difficult (by this I mean he mis-emphasizes many words for the sake of perpetuating the syncopation - a stylistic concern of the music that trumps his concern for relaying the text). In texted music that is well-written, the text will be the driving force of the sound, causing composers to choose rhythms, pitches, and dynamics that support, rather than contradict the natural spoken quality of the words. The style of the sound of rap takes precedence over the concern for the listener's understanding of the text. I am in no way saying that God is the composer of classical music. God is not the composer of any music that we listen to. Of course, I believe the Scripture that says that all things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made that was made. My understanding of this is that God created the raw physical elements that we use for music: frequency, amplitude, timbre, and duration. But man uses these things to create the organized sound we call music. God no more creates an aria by Bach than He does a rap song by Shai Linne. He has given both men the same raw elements to work with, but they create differently according to their gifts and skill levels. The same is true of authors, poets, painters, sculptors, etc. God creates the clay that man uses to form his statue, but God doesn't sculpt the statue. The Scriptures give many instructions for worship and there are hundreds of passages that specifically discuss music (more than 600). No, there is no passage prohibiting specific musical styles. But there are many, many passages among those that discuss worship and music that point to principles by which we should measure what we bring before the Lord in our gathered worship. You quickly dismiss passages regarding worship that don't specifically mention music, but that have strong bearing on the music we use in worship. Psalm 29:2 and 96:9 command us to worship the Lord not *because* he is holy (though that's certainly appropriate from other passages, but not the essence of these passages), but to worship the Lord *in* the splendor (beauty) of holiness. Shall worshiping the Lord in holiness include pursuing the inclusion of music from the most debased aspect of a culture? Does that cause you to even ponder the goal of appropriating rap music for use in corporate worship? Translations of I Cor 14:40 include doing everything in worship in a fitting way, an appropriate way, and in good form. Does everything in worship include music? Does music fit into Paul's exhortation to do everything in worship in a fitting or appropriate way? Or is music exempt from the word 'everything?' The musicians described in Scripture studied for years (no one was permitted to lead in worship who was under 30 years of age) under close supervision to develop the skills required before being allowed to lead in music in worship. I Chronicles provides an extended description of the musicians, their training, and their tasks. I believe our main purpose, Jeremy, is worship. Those evangelized are being evangelized *to worship.* How we worship is prescribed by God and therefore not a detraction. It's very worth considering what the Lord has to say on these issues. Dear Jeremy,

Let me begin by stating emphatically that there’s no hostility at all! I apologize if I gave that impression. Sometimes I’m just blunt, but not hostile! So forgive my bluntness. Let me also thank you for your tone and honesty in discussing this matter. I’ve not taken anything you’ve said to be disrespectful. I think you bring up very good points.

The worship I am speaking of is corporate worship. Corporate worship is the gathering of God’s elect as a body to offer praise (both sung and spoken), thanksgiving, confession of sin, prayer, to hear His word read and preached, and to bring tithes and offerings. Though the Lord may use worship evangelistically, it is designed by God for His people to praise Him for what He has done for them through Christ, and not as evangelism (I Cor 14:24). I believe the purpose of evangelism is worship, not that the purpose of worship is evangelism. Music is a commanded element of worship to be used by God’s people as they offer their praise and prayers to God; singing is directed to God and is for God. Here’s a brief list of biblical reasons why God wants us to sing. I didn’t include citations for reasons of length, but the following are all from Scripture.

Because he is highly exalted. To tell of his wonderful acts. To proclaim his salvation day after day. Because of the joy we have in his refuge. Because he has been good to me. To exalt him and praise his might. Because he is our King and Lord. Because he is our fortress and our refuge we sing of his strength and love.
Because he is King of all the earth. Because he is our help. To sing the glory of his name and make his praise glorious. To make his faithfulness known through all generations. Because he makes us glad by his deeds, I sing for joy at the works of his hands. Because he has done marvelous things; his right hand and his holy arm have worked salvation for him. Because all of his commands are righteous. Because the glory of the Lord is great. To celebrate his abundant goodness and joyfully sing of his righteousness. We are to sing to the Lord all our lives; as long as we live. Out of thanksgiving. To let it be known to all the world that he has done glorious things. Because he saves me. Because he has redeemed Jacob and displays his glory in Israel. Because he rescues the life of the needy from the hands of the wicked. To give us a spirit of unity among ourselves as we follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth we may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. To let the word of Christ dwell in us richly with gratitude in our hearts. To declare his name in the presence of the congregation.

A by-product of this is that believers will be edified. The purpose of singing during worship is not as evangelism or to entertain. Nowhere in Scripture does the Lord say that we should use music to evangelize. That doesn’t mean that He won’t/can’t use it, but again, He doesn’t promise it, command it, or model it in Scripture.

“But are the same emotions triggered in me that are in triggered in you when we listen to Bach and Mozart?” Naturally, not everyone will have the same emotional response to a piece by Bach or Mozart. But if you’ve followed my reasoning in previous posts, you will see that the reasons for this can be many. The most common reason is that listeners are capable of bringing their own biases to a listening experience, resulting in associative emotional responses. These are not responses triggered by the sound cues from the composer/performer (as described previously in the bioacoustic model), but rather individual responses brought to the listening experience by the listener. I am arguing that this highly individualistic associative model cannot be the model by which we choose music for worship since it is dependent on the individual rather than the music itself. Though individuals may have radically different reactions to any given music because of these associative models of communication, the church must choose music for worship that is based not on this chaotic, individualistic model. Rather, it must choose music based on the objective and natural sound characteristics of the music itself. I have also previously argued that if you’re unable to hear the natural musical cues in the sound of music – those that suggest the motion that links to our emotions – then you may well be desensitized to the sounds because of your regular musical diet. In your honesty above, you admit as much, saying, “And maybe I am rebelling against this argument because I listen to too much rap/hip hop, who knows.” It’s a bit like eating hot sauce on all your food for years and then being unable to taste the natural flavor of a food when it doesn’t have hot sauce (which for the purpose of this analogy is the backbeat found in all pop/rock music). The sound constructs of rap are very uniform. That’s what makes it recognizable as rap. It’s very difficult for those who listen to such a steady diet of a music like rap, with such uniform and immediately accessible sound constructs, to disengage from their diet to hear music that emphasizes other elements of the sound, such as melody or harmony. There is a desensitization process that occurs when drums accenting beats 2 and 4 are the primary sound in all or most of the music you listen to. I believe the sound of the music should be composed by skilled composers to communicate the affects of the texts. The affect of the text should therefore determine the sound constructs/style of the music. When these texts contain Gospel truths, and the composer has done his job well in correlating the music to the affect of the text, the human heart is taught well how to feel about the propositional content of the text. (Remember that Joshua and Moses first heard the *sound* of idolatry before they saw the idolatrous behavior. Ex. 32:17-18)

Before writing this, I listened another time to Shai Linne’s “The Greatest Story Ever Told.” I first listened to it in another room, where, although I could hear all the sounds, the words were not distinguishable. I’m sorry, Jeremy, but the sound characteristics of this music are as I said: the syncopation of the backbeat is dominant and driving the affect, Shai Linne’s voice is hypnotically and repetitively monotone and loud, and toward the end his voice gets even louder, suggesting increasing anger in the context of the backbeat and the monotone. His voice sounds like the voice of someone yelling at someone else in anger. When I listen more specifically to the content of the words, I am struck even more by the incongruity of the text with the sound. The sound of his voice suggests that he is angry with someone and yelling at them. Additionally, the inflections he uses for the text are not natural; they do damage to the intelligibility of the words, making comprehension much more difficult (by this I mean he mis-emphasizes many words for the sake of perpetuating the syncopation – a stylistic concern of the music that trumps his concern for relaying the text). In texted music that is well-written, the text will be the driving force of the sound, causing composers to choose rhythms, pitches, and dynamics that support, rather than contradict the natural spoken quality of the words. The style of the sound of rap takes precedence over the concern for the listener’s understanding of the text.

I am in no way saying that God is the composer of classical music. God is not the composer of any music that we listen to. Of course, I believe the Scripture that says that all things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made that was made. My understanding of this is that God created the raw physical elements that we use for music: frequency, amplitude, timbre, and duration. But man uses these things to create the organized sound we call music. God no more creates an aria by Bach than He does a rap song by Shai Linne. He has given both men the same raw elements to work with, but they create differently according to their gifts and skill levels. The same is true of authors, poets, painters, sculptors, etc. God creates the clay that man uses to form his statue, but God doesn’t sculpt the statue.

The Scriptures give many instructions for worship and there are hundreds of passages that specifically discuss music (more than 600). No, there is no passage prohibiting specific musical styles. But there are many, many passages among those that discuss worship and music that point to principles by which we should measure what we bring before the Lord in our gathered worship. You quickly dismiss passages regarding worship that don’t specifically mention music, but that have strong bearing on the music we use in worship. Psalm 29:2 and 96:9 command us to worship the Lord not *because* he is holy (though that’s certainly appropriate from other passages, but not the essence of these passages), but to worship the Lord *in* the splendor (beauty) of holiness. Shall worshiping the Lord in holiness include pursuing the inclusion of music from the most debased aspect of a culture? Does that cause you to even ponder the goal of appropriating rap music for use in corporate worship? Translations of I Cor 14:40 include doing everything in worship in a fitting way, an appropriate way, and in good form. Does everything in worship include music? Does music fit into Paul’s exhortation to do everything in worship in a fitting or appropriate way? Or is music exempt from the word ‘everything?’ The musicians described in Scripture studied for years (no one was permitted to lead in worship who was under 30 years of age) under close supervision to develop the skills required before being allowed to lead in music in worship. I Chronicles provides an extended description of the musicians, their training, and their tasks.

I believe our main purpose, Jeremy, is worship. Those evangelized are being evangelized *to worship.* How we worship is prescribed by God and therefore not a detraction. It’s very worth considering what the Lord has to say on these issues.

]]> By: Tim S. http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1401 Tim S. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:06:58 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1401 Dear Tom, Thought-provoking questions! All of my comments have been in the context of music for gathered corporate worship. The apostle Paul's exhortation to think on that which is lovely, noble, pure, excellent, praiseworthy, etc., (Phil 4:8) would seem to have a bearing on our personal choices for reading, music listening, movies, and all our activities. To that end, rap is not the best example of musical craftsmanship. But I wouldn't be here arguing vigorously for individual preferences what music to listen to in the concert hall or on the stereo. There's obviously no notated music from the first century church as notation didn't begin to develop until the 9th century. Descriptions are sketchy at best. There is one volume by Suzanne Haik Vantoura that has interesting speculation on the sound of the Jewish music of the time, but still, nothing certain. It's probable that much of the instrumental music of the time was monophonic (one note at a time or no harmony). But melody alone is certainly capable of carrying great emotional affect. When the Bible is specific in its mentions of music it almost always alludes to (or specifically mentions) melody alone. (There is one exception to this in 2 Chron 5:13 where the description of the sound might imply a richer texture than just monophony, but not necessarily). Certainly when the music was under the Lord's specific direction it was suitable (see all of I and II Chronicles and I and II Kings). I'm sure the hymn that Jesus sang on the night before his crucifixion was suitable, even if it was only melody! In other words, music doesn't have to have complex harmonies and developed rhythmic motives to have beautiful affects. Much of the 9th century chant is beautiful and highly appropriate to the text it carries from a bioacoustic perspective. But music has continued to develop across the centuries. Polyphony (harmony) was developed in the church, for the church, by the church. The history of western music is inseparable from the history of the church. Ancient modes are absolutely useable by the church (and is even today!). In fact, this morning in church we sang "Wondrous Love" a melody in Dorian mode. Often (not always), in cultures where tonality is not understood as Western culture understands it, music exists in the form of extended drones or repetitive rhythm patterns for the purposes of chant and meditation. (In fact, much of rap resembles this.) This music has its purpose in a culture where Christ is not, often as a means to induce trance and altered states of being (extended repetition being the primary musical device). When Christ enters the life of an individual, He changes that person. If that person is an author, one would expect his writing to change. If a musician, Christ's change in the person's life would necessarily impact all aspects of his being, including his composition. Not right away necessarily, but ultimately and eventually. (Frances Schaeffer has much to say about this in "How Should We Then Live." Scott has an excellent article elsewhere on this website about this topic.) Consider the change in the works of Michelangelo after his conversion. In fact, one of the reasons music developed the way it has in Western culture is that Western culture is where Christ has been the longest and has therefore had the most influence on culture. As the Gospel now makes big inroads into Asia (Korea first, China, Taiwan, Japan, Malasia) what impact can we expect to see from that region's artists, authors, playwrites, and musicians? Hopefully, a Christ-centered China will produce different kinds of art, literature, and music than a Confucius-centered China. I don't apologize for this view, though it might be viewed as imperialistic by some. According to Scripture, Christ-wrought imperialism is on its way inevitably. To become more Christ-like then, before His coming and as informed by His Word, is a privilege. I don't have a lot of knowledge about dance, either ancient or modern and so can't speak about that with any certainty. Dear Tom,

Thought-provoking questions! All of my comments have been in the context of music for gathered corporate worship. The apostle Paul’s exhortation to think on that which is lovely, noble, pure, excellent, praiseworthy, etc., (Phil 4:8) would seem to have a bearing on our personal choices for reading, music listening, movies, and all our activities. To that end, rap is not the best example of musical craftsmanship. But I wouldn’t be here arguing vigorously for individual preferences what music to listen to in the concert hall or on the stereo.

There’s obviously no notated music from the first century church as notation didn’t begin to develop until the 9th century. Descriptions are sketchy at best. There is one volume by Suzanne Haik Vantoura that has interesting speculation on the sound of the Jewish music of the time, but still, nothing certain. It’s probable that much of the instrumental music of the time was monophonic (one note at a time or no harmony). But melody alone is certainly capable of carrying great emotional affect. When the Bible is specific in its mentions of music it almost always alludes to (or specifically mentions) melody alone. (There is one exception to this in 2 Chron 5:13 where the description of the sound might imply a richer texture than just monophony, but not necessarily). Certainly when the music was under the Lord’s specific direction it was suitable (see all of I and II Chronicles and I and II Kings). I’m sure the hymn that Jesus sang on the night before his crucifixion was suitable, even if it was only melody! In other words, music doesn’t have to have complex harmonies and developed rhythmic motives to have beautiful affects. Much of the 9th century chant is beautiful and highly appropriate to the text it carries from a bioacoustic perspective. But music has continued to develop across the centuries. Polyphony (harmony) was developed in the church, for the church, by the church. The history of western music is inseparable from the history of the church. Ancient modes are absolutely useable by the church (and is even today!). In fact, this morning in church we sang “Wondrous Love” a melody in Dorian mode.

Often (not always), in cultures where tonality is not understood as Western culture understands it, music exists in the form of extended drones or repetitive rhythm patterns for the purposes of chant and meditation. (In fact, much of rap resembles this.) This music has its purpose in a culture where Christ is not, often as a means to induce trance and altered states of being (extended repetition being the primary musical device). When Christ enters the life of an individual, He changes that person. If that person is an author, one would expect his writing to change. If a musician, Christ’s change in the person’s life would necessarily impact all aspects of his being, including his composition. Not right away necessarily, but ultimately and eventually. (Frances Schaeffer has much to say about this in “How Should We Then Live.” Scott has an excellent article elsewhere on this website about this topic.) Consider the change in the works of Michelangelo after his conversion. In fact, one of the reasons music developed the way it has in Western culture is that Western culture is where Christ has been the longest and has therefore had the most influence on culture. As the Gospel now makes big inroads into Asia (Korea first, China, Taiwan, Japan, Malasia) what impact can we expect to see from that region’s artists, authors, playwrites, and musicians? Hopefully, a Christ-centered China will produce different kinds of art, literature, and music than a Confucius-centered China. I don’t apologize for this view, though it might be viewed as imperialistic by some. According to Scripture, Christ-wrought imperialism is on its way inevitably. To become more Christ-like then, before His coming and as informed by His Word, is a privilege. I don’t have a lot of knowledge about dance, either ancient or modern and so can’t speak about that with any certainty.

]]> By: Jeremy Bridgeman http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1399 Jeremy Bridgeman Sun, 15 Nov 2009 07:52:43 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1399 Dear Tim, I sense from reading your last post a bit of hostility developing. Let me clear the air, I do not mean any disrespect to you and I will make sure to choose my words carefully. If I have come off as placing my trust in music as a means of grace, let me apologize for that. That was and is not my intention or belief. I think we might need to ask each other some questions to clarify where we each are coming from, so since I am writing this now and you will not see this until after I post it, I will start. What is your definition of worship? Is music not to be used in/for evangelism? I understand the argument in terms of musical composition and I understand the characteristics you described. But are the same emotions triggered in me that are in triggered in you when we listen to Bach and Mozart? This is an opinion, I disagree with the assessment of rap/hip hop only invoking emotions along the spectrum "...surprise to agitation to sensuality, to anger and rebellion (and other affects along these lines)" and I understand that I am going against the norm. There is rap/hip hop on the secular as well as the Christian side that invokes emotions outside of this spectrum. The rap/hip hop to me that it seems like you are describing is "gangster" rap/hip hop. They are distinct sounds within rap/hip hop and maybe you have or have not experienced them. When you compare secular rap/hip hop to Christian rap/hip hop there sounds are different. And maybe I am rebelling against this argument because I listen to too much rap/hip hop, who knows. God is not the composer of rap/hip hop music, but According to John 1:3, "All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made." And Colossians 1:16, "For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him." How do you interpret these passages of Scripture? But are you saying God is the composer of classical music, such as Bach or Mozart? I think that my reference to Jeremiah 32:27 is valid if everything was created by Him and for Him. Is God not powerful enough to use what He has created to glorify Himself? Rap/Hip Hop music invokes emotions of rebellion, okay. Well, there is an artist who Shai Linne mentioned, Lecrae, who has an album entitled Rebel. He encourages His listeners to "rebel" against the culture of today. Anger could be used to demonstrate God's feeling towards sin. Agitation could be used to demonstrate God's frustration with sinners. Surprise could be used to demonstrate how Christ will return, "...as a thief in the night..." 2 Peter 3:10. We both agree that music without words communicates and you will admit that it is possible that rap/hip hop communicates something you do not understand. Is it possible that the music of Bach and Mozart communicate a message that is not understood by some of the people today? Maybe a different style is needed for different people, do you agree? The requirement to worship God is set by Jesus Himself in John 4:19-24. We are to worship in spirit and truth. This can not be refuted. You have admitted that it is possible that you might not understand what is being communicated in rap/hip hop and I admit that I might not understand what is being communicated by Bach and Mozart. The same piece of music can invoke two different emotions in two people, but I have to admit that they are trends. I understand your vocation is to study music, but are you willing to put what your vocation tells you above that of what God tells you? Can you point to a Scripture that tells us that a specific style of music inherently incongruent with God's message or are you placing that requirement on music yourself? Our ways are not His ways, correct? Of the verses you cite for music only the last two deal with music in context of scripture. Psalm 29:2 and Psalm 96:9 mention nothing of music, but to worship the LORD because He is holy (set apart). 1 Corinthians 14:40 deals with order during worship in the Church not music. So do we only worship God while at Church? I would gather from the context of the verse from 1 Corinthians that worship involves more than just music, do you agree? The last two passages due address that the composers were skillful, so are you saying rap/hip hop music is not skillful? Tim we have established that God judges by the heart. God tells us to worship in spirit and truth. There are no verses in scripture which define the style of music to worship God. The studying of music you have done, is from man's point of view, not God's point of view. I agree with you, the text of your song along does not determine the sincerity of your belief, but we are talking about worship. And Jesus said we must worship in spirit and truth and only God knows the heart, so only God knows when we or anyone else truly worships. So how can you say that a certain type of music can not be used to worship God, when you can only evaluate half of the requirement? You can make an educated guess based off James 2:26. For you to say rap/ hip hop can not be used to worship God is unbiblical because you can not determine a man's heart, only God can. I do believe that rap/ hip hop has restrictions inherent in the way it communicates its message; I do not think it would lend itself well to a congregation using it. But that does not mean that a person can not recite the words of a christian rap/hip hop song or write words to a christian rap/hip hop song and it be worship. Tim and Tom, this will have to be my last post. I feel that this issue is detracting from our main task, going out into all nations and making disciples and teaching them to obeys the commands Jesus gave us. I will say that you have good arguments Tim, but they seem to flow from your vocation more than from your biblical view. Should it not be the other way around? That last statement and question our my observation, and do not necessarily mean that is the case. I pray God will continue to work in your lives and draw you closer unto Himself. I have enjoyed the dialogue. Dear Tim,

I sense from reading your last post a bit of hostility developing. Let me clear the air, I do not mean any disrespect to you and I will make sure to choose my words carefully.

If I have come off as placing my trust in music as a means of grace, let me apologize for that. That was and is not my intention or belief. I think we might need to ask each other some questions to clarify where we each are coming from, so since I am writing this now and you will not see this until after I post it, I will start. What is your definition of worship? Is music not to be used in/for evangelism?

I understand the argument in terms of musical composition and I understand the characteristics you described. But are the same emotions triggered in me that are in triggered in you when we listen to Bach and Mozart?

This is an opinion, I disagree with the assessment of rap/hip hop only invoking emotions along the spectrum “…surprise to agitation to sensuality, to anger and rebellion (and other affects along these lines)” and I understand that I am going against the norm. There is rap/hip hop on the secular as well as the Christian side that invokes emotions outside of this spectrum. The rap/hip hop to me that it seems like you are describing is “gangster” rap/hip hop. They are distinct sounds within rap/hip hop and maybe you have or have not experienced them. When you compare secular rap/hip hop to Christian rap/hip hop there sounds are different. And maybe I am rebelling against this argument because I listen to too much rap/hip hop, who knows.

God is not the composer of rap/hip hop music, but According to John 1:3, “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” And Colossians 1:16, “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.” How do you interpret these passages of Scripture? But are you saying God is the composer of classical music, such as Bach or Mozart? I think that my reference to Jeremiah 32:27 is valid if everything was created by Him and for Him. Is God not powerful enough to use what He has created to glorify Himself?

Rap/Hip Hop music invokes emotions of rebellion, okay. Well, there is an artist who Shai Linne mentioned, Lecrae, who has an album entitled Rebel. He encourages His listeners to “rebel” against the culture of today. Anger could be used to demonstrate God’s feeling towards sin. Agitation could be used to demonstrate God’s frustration with sinners. Surprise could be used to demonstrate how Christ will return, “…as a thief in the night…” 2 Peter 3:10.

We both agree that music without words communicates and you will admit that it is possible that rap/hip hop communicates something you do not understand. Is it possible that the music of Bach and Mozart communicate a message that is not understood by some of the people today? Maybe a different style is needed for different people, do you agree?

The requirement to worship God is set by Jesus Himself in John 4:19-24. We are to worship in spirit and truth. This can not be refuted. You have admitted that it is possible that you might not understand what is being communicated in rap/hip hop and I admit that I might not understand what is being communicated by Bach and Mozart. The same piece of music can invoke two different emotions in two people, but I have to admit that they are trends. I understand your vocation is to study music, but are you willing to put what your vocation tells you above that of what God tells you? Can you point to a Scripture that tells us that a specific style of music inherently incongruent with God’s message or are you placing that requirement on music yourself? Our ways are not His ways, correct?

Of the verses you cite for music only the last two deal with music in context of scripture. Psalm 29:2 and Psalm 96:9 mention nothing of music, but to worship the LORD because He is holy (set apart). 1 Corinthians 14:40 deals with order during worship in the Church not music. So do we only worship God while at Church? I would gather from the context of the verse from 1 Corinthians that worship involves more than just music, do you agree? The last two passages due address that the composers were skillful, so are you saying rap/hip hop music is not skillful?

Tim we have established that God judges by the heart. God tells us to worship in spirit and truth. There are no verses in scripture which define the style of music to worship God. The studying of music you have done, is from man’s point of view, not God’s point of view. I agree with you, the text of your song along does not determine the sincerity of your belief, but we are talking about worship. And Jesus said we must worship in spirit and truth and only God knows the heart, so only God knows when we or anyone else truly worships. So how can you say that a certain type of music can not be used to worship God, when you can only evaluate half of the requirement? You can make an educated guess based off James 2:26.

For you to say rap/ hip hop can not be used to worship God is unbiblical because you can not determine a man’s heart, only God can. I do believe that rap/ hip hop has restrictions inherent in the way it communicates its message; I do not think it would lend itself well to a congregation using it. But that does not mean that a person can not recite the words of a christian rap/hip hop song or write words to a christian rap/hip hop song and it be worship.

Tim and Tom, this will have to be my last post. I feel that this issue is detracting from our main task, going out into all nations and making disciples and teaching them to obeys the commands Jesus gave us. I will say that you have good arguments Tim, but they seem to flow from your vocation more than from your biblical view. Should it not be the other way around? That last statement and question our my observation, and do not necessarily mean that is the case. I pray God will continue to work in your lives and draw you closer unto Himself. I have enjoyed the dialogue.

]]> By: Tim S. http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1398 Tim S. Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:53:01 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1398 Dear Jeremy, Thanks for answering my questions, and thanks for responding to the content of the discussion. First, I'd like to follow up the two questions you answered with another question: If music can represent the range of human emotions, and if some human emotions are sinful in the sight of God would it not follow that music that conveys those emotions that God finds sinful would not also be sinful? (Lust, rebellion, anger, for example.) I'm ignoring your comment about context for the moment, since I'm not sure what you mean by that. Jeremy, I don't think you're understanding the explanations of musical communication that I'm describing. Maybe that because I'm not being clear about how music communicates. It's not merely my opinion. It's the way the sounds composers choose relate to the human psyche. When a composer chooses loud repetitive impulses of sounds that rapidly ascend in pitch, for example, this is perceived by human beings as belonging to a certain narrow band of the emotional spectrum. It may be possible to confuse certain sounds that are close together along this band of the emotional spectrum, but it's not possible to confuse a sound like I've described with feelings of calmness and restfulness. As another example, the rhythmic phenomenon known as syncopation characterizes all of rap/music. In fact, it is present in virtually all of pop/rock. The sound of syncopation evokes emotions along a particular band of the emotional spectrum and can range from surprise to agitation to sensuality, to anger and rebellion (and other affects along these lines) depending on other musical circumstances (tempo, volume, frequency, rate, pitch distance, harmony, etc., etc.). The very definition of syncopation is that the sound must rhythmically contradict or oppose that which is the rhythmic norm in order to achieve these affects. Its musical/emotional meaning is therefore tied to its very essence. Its presence is defined in sound by rhythmic opposition to the norm and without opposition to the norm appearing in its sound, it is not syncopation. Rap not only uses syncopation pervasively, but syncopation dominates the texture of the sound. By that I mean that the volume of the syncopation is nearly always the very loudest aspect of the sound in rap - there is no hiding it or subduing it. If it weren't there, it would not be considered rap. It is a defining element of the style and it brings with it these emotional meanings that are rooted in opposition to the norm. So I hope you see that it's not my opinion, it's a self-defining musical fact that presents itself in affective communication. You repeatedly refer to it as "my argument" or "my opinion" but in reality, it's the way music has been understood for centuries until the past 40-50 years when post-modern philosophies influenced musical criticism and the general population saying that any music can mean anything to anybody. Yes it is very complex, which is why it takes years of study to absorb. But one thing it's not, is "just my opinion." You misunderstood my statement about Bach's music. Perhaps I wasn't clear. The music I refer to by Bach that is not congruent with the Gospel is found largely in his dance suites - secular forms that he didn't intend for the church, but as stylized dances. The music that Bach composed to be congruent with the Gospel is music in which he used interval patterns, rhythmic motives, and harmonic sequences that are designed to evoke feelings of lament, joy, majesty, etc. as these feelings manifest themselves in human beings' patterns of motion when they are feeling these emotions. When these sounds are correctly conjoined to biblical texts or themes, as they are when Bach intends them to be, they are perfectly suited to be sung in worship. These connections of motion to emotion are easy to observe. When I watch "America's Got Talent" for example, I never see winners sulking off stage with downward body language. When winners names' are announced, they universally jump up, their hands go up in the air, their eyes go up - everything about them is UP.) 300 years ago in Germany, Bach knew about this same human attachment of upward motion to the feeling of joy. Good composers learn to approximate it in sound with crescendos, upwardly moving melodies, upwardly moving harmonic sequences, 'up'-tempos, etc. These upward ideas in music are understood as conveying joy because they match the body's natural motions when we feel joy. And this is just one example. The number of emotions and they ways to convey them are enormous. Rap and hip/hop composers are limited in their emotional spectrum because of the need to set their ideas in this pervasive, dominating sound of syncopation. Syncopation is a stylistic necessity for all of the broad spectrum of pop/rock. Without it, it's not understood as pop. Nobody listens to it; nobody understands it as cool; and most importantly, nobody buys it. It is the syncopation (in the form of immediate gratification of motion) that sells the music. So my answer is, "no," rap/hip-hop composers cannot determine to choose sound elements that are congruent with the Gospel without betraying the style that their customers want. I think your first citation of the Jeremiah quote is misplaced, since God is not the composer of rap/hip-hop. I think your paragraph that begins, "For you to say . . . " contains a typo. I'm not sure what you mean in that sentence about finding a facet of the Gospel that is congruent with the Gospel. To answer your question in that paragraph, sure it's possible that rap communicates in a way that I don't understand but others do. I am sinful and full of flaws, prone to mistakes and error. But interpreting music is my vocation. I'm paid to do it. I also tend to accept the witness provided in the text content of the vast majority of rap that supports my interpretation that the sound itself is a signifier of anger, rebellion, sex, and lust. Your language analogy is a nice try but it doesn't hold water. I've taught many students whose language I don't speak and who don't speak English but who understand the emotional content of the passage we're working on together because of the sounds of the melodies, the harmonies, the rhythms, and the volumes. That rap communicates to a lot of people is not at issue. What it communicates is. Have you heard the axiom that music is "the universal language"? The reason for this is that people understand the sounds of music at an emotional level according to the motions that the sounds communicate. Jeremy, if you as a true believer decide to compose a song, that song doesn't give me an insight into the status of your heart and your relationship with God. It only gives me an insight into your musical craftsmanship and the kinds of emotions you are attempting to communicate through the sounds you choose. I do agree with Tom that the Spirit doesn't inspire that which is incongruent with His revealed Word. In any case, I cannot judge your heart based on a melody you compose, or the harmonies you select, or the rhythms you choose. One can determine if the text you write is biblical but even that doesn't confirm the sincerity of your belief (James 2:19) or that you are truly trusting in Christ alone for your salvation. Of course we are to worship in spirit and truth, no argument here. I did not say that the heart was not an issue in worship, as you imply above. But the heart is not an issue in whether or not a composer can write worship music that believers can use in worship. Unbelievers can write beautiful music with theologically correct lyrics that believers can use for praise in worship. By the same token, believers are capable of writing junky music with poor poetry and bad theology that shouldn't be anywhere near the church. Music is a skill and must be developed (Psalm 33:3, I Chronicles 15:22). By His common grace, the Lord allows Mozart (who by all accounts was not a believer) to compose as beautifully and theologically correctly as Bach (who by all indications was a true believer). But their compositions are most surely not the indicators of whether they were or were not worshiping in spirit and truth. Only the Lord can judge that. So I reiterate that I'm not judging their hearts, nor am I judging their worship. I am only judging the musical product they produce. Would you insist that the craftsmen who make the chairs you sit on during worship be believers? Or would you insist that those who bottled the wine or grape juice you use in the Lord's Supper be believers? By the same token, if a composer writes excellent music for a biblically true text, believers may use this product for worship. If you as a believer composed music that communicated rebellion and set it to biblical texts, I would judge its communication against principles revealed about music in Scripture. Is it set apart (Psalm 29:2, 96:9)? Is it fitting (I Cor. 14:40)? Is it skillfully done (Psalm 33:3, I Chron. 15:22)? I have nowhere said that God couldn't use music (of any kind) as a means of grace. It's just that He never promised to do so. Trusting in music as a means of grace is decidedly unbiblical. It elevates music to a status equivalent to that of His Word, preaching, prayer, or the Lord's Supper - elements of worship which He did promise to use as a means of grace. I think it's dangerous to step outside of His word and trust music on issues of eternal significance. I don't believe it's limiting God to stick to trusting the promises in His word. I think rather it's a lack of trust to add elements to his promised means of grace. I hope I addressed all your points, Jeremy. Thank you for the dialogue. I think it's very profitable. Dear Jeremy,

Thanks for answering my questions, and thanks for responding to the content of the discussion.

First, I’d like to follow up the two questions you answered with another question:

If music can represent the range of human emotions, and if some human emotions are sinful in the sight of God would it not follow that music that conveys those emotions that God finds sinful would not also be sinful? (Lust, rebellion, anger, for example.) I’m ignoring your comment about context for the moment, since I’m not sure what you mean by that.

Jeremy, I don’t think you’re understanding the explanations of musical communication that I’m describing. Maybe that because I’m not being clear about how music communicates. It’s not merely my opinion. It’s the way the sounds composers choose relate to the human psyche. When a composer chooses loud repetitive impulses of sounds that rapidly ascend in pitch, for example, this is perceived by human beings as belonging to a certain narrow band of the emotional spectrum. It may be possible to confuse certain sounds that are close together along this band of the emotional spectrum, but it’s not possible to confuse a sound like I’ve described with feelings of calmness and restfulness.

As another example, the rhythmic phenomenon known as syncopation characterizes all of rap/music. In fact, it is present in virtually all of pop/rock. The sound of syncopation evokes emotions along a particular band of the emotional spectrum and can range from surprise to agitation to sensuality, to anger and rebellion (and other affects along these lines) depending on other musical circumstances (tempo, volume, frequency, rate, pitch distance, harmony, etc., etc.). The very definition of syncopation is that the sound must rhythmically contradict or oppose that which is the rhythmic norm in order to achieve these affects. Its musical/emotional meaning is therefore tied to its very essence. Its presence is defined in sound by rhythmic opposition to the norm and without opposition to the norm appearing in its sound, it is not syncopation. Rap not only uses syncopation pervasively, but syncopation dominates the texture of the sound. By that I mean that the volume of the syncopation is nearly always the very loudest aspect of the sound in rap – there is no hiding it or subduing it. If it weren’t there, it would not be considered rap. It is a defining element of the style and it brings with it these emotional meanings that are rooted in opposition to the norm. So I hope you see that it’s not my opinion, it’s a self-defining musical fact that presents itself in affective communication. You repeatedly refer to it as “my argument” or “my opinion” but in reality, it’s the way music has been understood for centuries until the past 40-50 years when post-modern philosophies influenced musical criticism and the general population saying that any music can mean anything to anybody. Yes it is very complex, which is why it takes years of study to absorb. But one thing it’s not, is “just my opinion.”

You misunderstood my statement about Bach’s music. Perhaps I wasn’t clear. The music I refer to by Bach that is not congruent with the Gospel is found largely in his dance suites – secular forms that he didn’t intend for the church, but as stylized dances. The music that Bach composed to be congruent with the Gospel is music in which he used interval patterns, rhythmic motives, and harmonic sequences that are designed to evoke feelings of lament, joy, majesty, etc. as these feelings manifest themselves in human beings’ patterns of motion when they are feeling these emotions. When these sounds are correctly conjoined to biblical texts or themes, as they are when Bach intends them to be, they are perfectly suited to be sung in worship.

These connections of motion to emotion are easy to observe. When I watch “America’s Got Talent” for example, I never see winners sulking off stage with downward body language. When winners names’ are announced, they universally jump up, their hands go up in the air, their eyes go up – everything about them is UP.) 300 years ago in Germany, Bach knew about this same human attachment of upward motion to the feeling of joy. Good composers learn to approximate it in sound with crescendos, upwardly moving melodies, upwardly moving harmonic sequences, ‘up’-tempos, etc. These upward ideas in music are understood as conveying joy because they match the body’s natural motions when we feel joy. And this is just one example. The number of emotions and they ways to convey them are enormous. Rap and hip/hop composers are limited in their emotional spectrum because of the need to set their ideas in this pervasive, dominating sound of syncopation. Syncopation is a stylistic necessity for all of the broad spectrum of pop/rock. Without it, it’s not understood as pop. Nobody listens to it; nobody understands it as cool; and most importantly, nobody buys it. It is the syncopation (in the form of immediate gratification of motion) that sells the music. So my answer is, “no,” rap/hip-hop composers cannot determine to choose sound elements that are congruent with the Gospel without betraying the style that their customers want. I think your first citation of the Jeremiah quote is misplaced, since God is not the composer of rap/hip-hop.

I think your paragraph that begins, “For you to say . . . ” contains a typo. I’m not sure what you mean in that sentence about finding a facet of the Gospel that is congruent with the Gospel. To answer your question in that paragraph, sure it’s possible that rap communicates in a way that I don’t understand but others do. I am sinful and full of flaws, prone to mistakes and error. But interpreting music is my vocation. I’m paid to do it. I also tend to accept the witness provided in the text content of the vast majority of rap that supports my interpretation that the sound itself is a signifier of anger, rebellion, sex, and lust. Your language analogy is a nice try but it doesn’t hold water. I’ve taught many students whose language I don’t speak and who don’t speak English but who understand the emotional content of the passage we’re working on together because of the sounds of the melodies, the harmonies, the rhythms, and the volumes. That rap communicates to a lot of people is not at issue. What it communicates is. Have you heard the axiom that music is “the universal language”? The reason for this is that people understand the sounds of music at an emotional level according to the motions that the sounds communicate.

Jeremy, if you as a true believer decide to compose a song, that song doesn’t give me an insight into the status of your heart and your relationship with God. It only gives me an insight into your musical craftsmanship and the kinds of emotions you are attempting to communicate through the sounds you choose. I do agree with Tom that the Spirit doesn’t inspire that which is incongruent with His revealed Word. In any case, I cannot judge your heart based on a melody you compose, or the harmonies you select, or the rhythms you choose. One can determine if the text you write is biblical but even that doesn’t confirm the sincerity of your belief (James 2:19) or that you are truly trusting in Christ alone for your salvation.

Of course we are to worship in spirit and truth, no argument here. I did not say that the heart was not an issue in worship, as you imply above. But the heart is not an issue in whether or not a composer can write worship music that believers can use in worship. Unbelievers can write beautiful music with theologically correct lyrics that believers can use for praise in worship. By the same token, believers are capable of writing junky music with poor poetry and bad theology that shouldn’t be anywhere near the church. Music is a skill and must be developed (Psalm 33:3, I Chronicles 15:22). By His common grace, the Lord allows Mozart (who by all accounts was not a believer) to compose as beautifully and theologically correctly as Bach (who by all indications was a true believer). But their compositions are most surely not the indicators of whether they were or were not worshiping in spirit and truth. Only the Lord can judge that. So I reiterate that I’m not judging their hearts, nor am I judging their worship. I am only judging the musical product they produce. Would you insist that the craftsmen who make the chairs you sit on during worship be believers? Or would you insist that those who bottled the wine or grape juice you use in the Lord’s Supper be believers? By the same token, if a composer writes excellent music for a biblically true text, believers may use this product for worship. If you as a believer composed music that communicated rebellion and set it to biblical texts, I would judge its communication against principles revealed about music in Scripture. Is it set apart (Psalm 29:2, 96:9)? Is it fitting (I Cor. 14:40)? Is it skillfully done (Psalm 33:3, I Chron. 15:22)?

I have nowhere said that God couldn’t use music (of any kind) as a means of grace. It’s just that He never promised to do so. Trusting in music as a means of grace is decidedly unbiblical. It elevates music to a status equivalent to that of His Word, preaching, prayer, or the Lord’s Supper – elements of worship which He did promise to use as a means of grace. I think it’s dangerous to step outside of His word and trust music on issues of eternal significance. I don’t believe it’s limiting God to stick to trusting the promises in His word. I think rather it’s a lack of trust to add elements to his promised means of grace.

I hope I addressed all your points, Jeremy. Thank you for the dialogue. I think it’s very profitable.

]]> By: Tom http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1397 Tom Sun, 15 Nov 2009 02:06:39 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1397 Forgot to ask this question . . . Tim, you mention Bach dance suites as examples of incongruence. Why? These forms are highly regular, organized, and, it would appear, exactly the kind of congruence you are advocating. What would the OT music have been like that accompanied worship dance and entertainment dance as outlined in the Psalms an elsewhere? While we're on the topic of dance, would you say there are objective criteria for discerning dance gestures as either congruent or incongruent with the Gospel? I would imagine so, since the gestures of music and dance parallel each other so closely. Thoughts? Forgot to ask this question . . . Tim, you mention Bach dance suites as examples of incongruence. Why? These forms are highly regular, organized, and, it would appear, exactly the kind of congruence you are advocating. What would the OT music have been like that accompanied worship dance and entertainment dance as outlined in the Psalms an elsewhere? While we’re on the topic of dance, would you say there are objective criteria for discerning dance gestures as either congruent or incongruent with the Gospel? I would imagine so, since the gestures of music and dance parallel each other so closely. Thoughts?

]]> By: Tom http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/featured/can-rap-be-christian-evaluating-hip-hop#comment-1396 Tom Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:49:17 +0000 http://www.religiousaffectionsministries.org/?p=2852#comment-1396 Hi Jeremy, Would the Spirit ever move someone to compose a song that in incongruent with the truths/affects of the Gospel? This is what Tim is saying, I think. Scott and Tim seem to be trying to create an objective, Scripture-based, paradigm whereby manipulations of musical elements can be discerned as either congruent or incongruent with Biblical truth/God's attributes. Regardless of how sure we are that we've been moved by the Spirit, if what results is incongruent with Scripture, there is strong evidence the Spirit was not at work. The Spirit never moves an individual to act contrary to the truth of Scripture. The question is whether or not there is objective truth that affords discernment regarding musical element manipulation (musical composition). Hi Tim, Thank you for providing some further examples of the affective nature of the Gospel. Would it be appropriate to use Rap in an oratorio where the scene in the oratorio was clearly about rebellion? We have a bit of knowledge regarding the music of the OT Jews. Would you agree that the music of the ancient Jews was less affective than what we are used to today? Would you agree that most of the music in the first century church was chant-based and homophonic? What I'm getting at is whether or not music, prior to the unique treatment and development it received in Western culture (beginning in the Renaissance), was suitable as a vehicle to carry the Gospel as you have outlined for us. Must non-Western cultures learn Western music in order to please God with their musical offerings? What do we do with cultures where tonality is not understood as Western culture understands it? Do you consider modal chant (say Dorian or Lydian, for example) an acceptable vehicle for the Gloria? Hi Jeremy,
Would the Spirit ever move someone to compose a song that in incongruent with the truths/affects of the Gospel? This is what Tim is saying, I think. Scott and Tim seem to be trying to create an objective, Scripture-based, paradigm whereby manipulations of musical elements can be discerned as either congruent or incongruent with Biblical truth/God’s attributes. Regardless of how sure we are that we’ve been moved by the Spirit, if what results is incongruent with Scripture, there is strong evidence the Spirit was not at work. The Spirit never moves an individual to act contrary to the truth of Scripture. The question is whether or not there is objective truth that affords discernment regarding musical element manipulation (musical composition).

Hi Tim,
Thank you for providing some further examples of the affective nature of the Gospel. Would it be appropriate to use Rap in an oratorio where the scene in the oratorio was clearly about rebellion?
We have a bit of knowledge regarding the music of the OT Jews. Would you agree that the music of the ancient Jews was less affective than what we are used to today? Would you agree that most of the music in the first century church was chant-based and homophonic? What I’m getting at is whether or not music, prior to the unique treatment and development it received in Western culture (beginning in the Renaissance), was suitable as a vehicle to carry the Gospel as you have outlined for us. Must non-Western cultures learn Western music in order to please God with their musical offerings? What do we do with cultures where tonality is not understood as Western culture understands it? Do you consider modal chant (say Dorian or Lydian, for example) an acceptable vehicle for the Gloria?

]]>