just to highlight something from that long, paragraphless post that I did six months ago, can you answer these questions, just for ex., I'm only making a case for love songs w/out provocative lyrics
1. If a friend told you about how much he loved someone, would you listen?
2. Do you listen to and/read love poetry that is not gospel?
3. Do you listen to Jazz, Classical piano, or any other wordless peices of music?
1- If you've answered yes to #1, then love songs can't be much worse because love poetry is only expression in verse, instead of the prose that people normally talk in. If your friend spoke only in verse like Shakespearean characters, you would be listening to love poetry w/out the title. (and then see #2)
2- If you've answered yes to #2, then you are, in a sense, listening to a love song w/out the beat, as most love song's lyrics are written before the music is added.
3- If you've answered yes to #3, then you should know that jazz is often based off of love songs (unless you meant gospel jazz), and is thus a secular peice. If you listen to classical music, then you should realize that many classical songs have the same purpose as many love songs do, and therefore was not made to the glory of GOD, so if secular music is a sin, then listening to secular peices is sinful too.
If you've answered no to all questions then you are very firm in your veiw of secular music and I admire your dedication to it (and also cannot persuade you)
Your rating system is a little off. First, Jazz has many different forms, so to conclude that a jazz song is a love song is too encompassing. Also with music we must examine it in terms of both the music and the lyrics. Relative to the music, jazz takes has a lot of it's roots from the church. It is moving and evokes feelings. Look at the basis of Ray Charles' best selling music--a derivative of Church music. (I know Ray wouldn't be classified as a jazz artist, but I hope you see my point). Music and song is something that belongs to God. Genesis speaks of the first song when the angels and stars sang praises to God's on his great creation. Personnaly, I feel that it is our music that has been pilfered, so why should I run away from it. And for those who have comments on the "seculari sound" of contemprary church music, what's wrong with taking back what was ours to begin with. Plus by definitition, it the music is religious in nature, it can't be classified as secular!! At best, its just a form of church music that's not pleasing to you.
Regarding Classical music you are again grouping too many different things together. Many classical pieces have no words and were written as exercise pieces, so how can you generalize and say they are based on love songs. Secondly, quick research reveals that many of the classical composers made their living off of writing commissioned masses, requiems and other works for the Church. Though primary the Catholic Church, for God's House nontheless. Through the years, their origin may have been lost, and even used in today's commercials, but does that make them secular? Also, If you open a Hymn book find Joyful, Joyful, We adore Thee, Jesus, I My Cross Have Taken or Hark The Voice of Jesus Is Calling , you will see that Mozart wrote the music for all three. Someone later on came along added their words, and turned it ito a hymn. Not to mention how many songs in the Hymn books are sung to the tune of an old irish melody. Should these songs be abolished from the hymn books?
I am a lover of good clean music regardless of the genre, and feel that even secular artists can sing gospel songs. Their songs may be an expression of a supressed spirit within them seeking to get out, and although some may think that they are using God to make money, I'd like those same folks to consider that fact that it is them who is really being used. Used by God to spread words of his goodness, love and providence to those who don't go to church, who don't have a religious foundation, and who might not otherwise recieve or be receptive to hearing the messages contained in the songs.
As you survey the new testament, Jesus always attracted people by what they could identify with. With the fishermen Peter, James and John, it was through fishing and telling them they could become fishers of men. With the farming types, he told parables about the mustard seed, the fig tree, and so on. You see, Jesus though never compromising his mission nor his purpose, always met the people on their level. If to be a Christian is to be Christ-like, is there anything wrong with following one of the models that he used? Let's get ourselves out of the Church and more into the lost massess and be less sanctimonious about what a "good" christian should or shouldn't do and be about winning souls on the outside and then bringing them into the Churches. Finally, if some of us want to so strongly rate (or judge) christians on their music listening tendacies, don't stop at that leisure hobby, we should also include discussions on the the appropiateness of going to plays, seeing the opera, watching sports, etc. Better yet, let's all become Amish or Menonites and do away with all contact with the outside world! Oops, please forgive me, I digressed way too far!!
Anyways, it was a good question and hopefully people on both sides and those sitting on the fence
will attempt to understand the responses in this thread even if at this point in time they don't agree. And please don't let your personal convictions be a judgement pushed onto others.
Poll
