Is “Contemporary Christian ‘Rock’ Music” Satanic?

CCRM-Concerned
CCRM-Concerned

May 2nd, 2007, 3:41 pm #11

<font face=arial>While Christian Rock Music has become one of the major enticements promoted by the Charismatic and Community Church Movements in their church and TV-programmed gatherings—and which undoubtedly has infected not only certain mega churches of Christ but also a number of fundamentalist and conservative church groups—there has also surfaced concerns that if this trend continues, the next and future generations will face a seemingly insurmountable task of determining what is reverential in God’s sight and what the pure gospel message is supposed to convey.

Are we in that group that should be concerned about whereto the Christian “Rock” Music is leading the “Christian” youth of this postmodern era, even certain adult “Christians” with similar tendencies or appellations as do the young Christians?

As the passages in Eph. 5:18,19 and Col. 3:16 clearly emphasize the truth that we “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly” and that we “teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,” do we take such truth to heart or do we let the “rock” music overshadow the truth?

Shouldn’t there be biblical screens that any Christian “rock” music must pass before it can be labeled as “Christian”? Perhaps, the “lyrics” screen would be the easiest form of examination upon which the Christian “rock” music is determined as a failure. What about the “character” screen—in this case, the “attitudes” depicted in the “rock” music and as portrayed by the “performers”? Is it reverential or worshipful; is there any expression of real AWE [not to be confused with the modern definition of the word “awesome”]?

Then, not the least of all and the often ignored “score” screen. Uh-huh! Many will argue that “the arrangement of the musical notes” has nothing to do with passing or failing the “score” screen. Are we prepared to rebut such a notion by stating that while the notes should compliment the words, in no way should the arrangement overshadow the message being conveyed? Otherwise, the “ROCK” music is no longer “Christian”?

Therefore, when the “Contemporary Christian ‘Rock’ Music” fails ANY ONE of the biblical screens, it is or it has become only “Rock” music and Satanic.</font>
<font face=arial>The premise that Christian Rock music is out there purposely for money-making ventures makes it the more important to mention the name of our Lord as a distinguishing mark that provides identification with our Father in heaven. The reality is that mentioning Jehovah will NOT sell.

“Strong tower” could easily apply to the female’s romantic partner who is either male or female. “Wandered”—Hmmm…. “Stranded in the valley”; “tired and all alone”—what’s going on here? The mention of these words and phrases found in Psalms is insufficient as they are commonly used in various cultures as well.

I am reminded of numerous Christian Rock musical pieces considered “praises” in certain congregations that have succumbed to cultural pressures. “You are the darling of my heart”; “Oh, I was made for this to know your tender kiss”; “I felt your warm embrace”; “I was made to love you, Jesus”; “Will I dance for you, Jesus”; “Oh my music makes you dance”; “You are the only One for me”; etc., etc.

Many of the Christian Rock musical pieces are very difficult for congregational singing. As written for the Performing Arts Center, often only the SOLOIST or the elite Praise Team is capable of excellent performances—thus, clapping gets in the act and the subsequent applause is inevitable.

Many of the Christian Rock musical pieces are written with the accompaniment of musical instruments. To incorporate such musical pieces into the reverential worship will obviously demand the man-contrived “Worship Leader” to do something to keep up with the musical beat, etc.; … and I believe you get the picture.

I believe that we need to review the initial post and honestly study and analyze as to which one or ones of the criteria determine the Rock music to fail. </font>
Quote
Share

TMP
TMP

May 3rd, 2007, 7:20 am #12

Don't you have better things to argue about? Every genre of Christian music has songs of varying quality and reflects the "contemporary" music of the day. Old hymns sound like classical music, since they were written by people with names like Handel and Bach. Songs from the 50's sound like big band. The bass line in "He Bore It All" sounds like trombones on parade. Many of the praise songs of today have a "pop" feel to them. Some of my favorite songs are old hymns. One reason is only the best have survived through the years. A good number of songs we are singing today will be forgotten in a few years. Are there songs today that are too inward focused? I'm sure there are, but the exegesis of the "Strong Tower" song above takes a particularly prejudiced mind to make the case for that one. Modern songs don’t have the monopoly on self centeredness. There are plenty of self focused songs I have memory of growing up. "I'm satisfied with a cottage below...but in that city...I want a gold one that silver lined!" Talk about self centered!

One of the reasons I like many of the praise songs today is because they are God-centered and based straight out of scripture. I could list lyrics to songs such as “Lamb of God” or “Blessed be the Name” that I believe are much more focused on God than pretty much anything I grew up singing in church. But I know it wouldn't do any good. Dr. Bill would try to find some angle to prove that they are really evil and Ken would babble about the Whore of Babylon or Zeus or something. But what I can tell you is that when I was going through an extremely difficult time in my life when my girlfriend was killed in a car wreck while I was driving, I almost gave up on God. The part of church that helped the most wasn't the sound doctrine I heard from the pulpit, or the King James prayers, or the "high church" songs, but it was the praise songs. Whenever I hear the song "Shout to the Lord" even today it brings back memories of that dark time and how I feel God used these songs to get me through. I nearly wore out a Steven Curtis Chapman CD, played his song "Free" probably hundreds of times.

So when I see a post saying "Jehovah doesn't sell" or "Strong Tower" could be a song to Satan, I do chuckle a little when I see how perspective can prejudice your opinion of things. Bill, I still encourage you to travel to a developing country and spend a few weeks using your physician skills in a village where the average salary is a dollar a day. I believe it may change your perspective on what is important and where you spend your energies. I know it has mine.

Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 3rd, 2007, 4:10 pm #13

<font face=arial>The premise that Christian Rock music is out there purposely for money-making ventures makes it the more important to mention the name of our Lord as a distinguishing mark that provides identification with our Father in heaven. The reality is that mentioning Jehovah will NOT sell.

“Strong tower” could easily apply to the female’s romantic partner who is either male or female. “Wandered”—Hmmm…. “Stranded in the valley”; “tired and all alone”—what’s going on here? The mention of these words and phrases found in Psalms is insufficient as they are commonly used in various cultures as well.

I am reminded of numerous Christian Rock musical pieces considered “praises” in certain congregations that have succumbed to cultural pressures. “You are the darling of my heart”; “Oh, I was made for this to know your tender kiss”; “I felt your warm embrace”; “I was made to love you, Jesus”; “Will I dance for you, Jesus”; “Oh my music makes you dance”; “You are the only One for me”; etc., etc.

Many of the Christian Rock musical pieces are very difficult for congregational singing. As written for the Performing Arts Center, often only the SOLOIST or the elite Praise Team is capable of excellent performances—thus, clapping gets in the act and the subsequent applause is inevitable.

Many of the Christian Rock musical pieces are written with the accompaniment of musical instruments. To incorporate such musical pieces into the reverential worship will obviously demand the man-contrived “Worship Leader” to do something to keep up with the musical beat, etc.; … and I believe you get the picture.

I believe that we need to review the initial post and honestly study and analyze as to which one or ones of the criteria determine the Rock music to fail. </font>
Good points. If songs that frequently mention the names of Jehovah, God, Jesus, Christ, Holy Spirit, and Savior do not sell well among the general public, then "Christian" artists surmise that songs that downplay "religion" but that incorporate a "romantic" or perhaps even a borderline erotic slant will rake in the big bucks. In other words, sex, even a hint of it, sells.

Yes, if the "Christian" rock music industry wants the world to sit up and take notice, it has to make its "Christian" music more appealing to the world. Romans 12:2; James 4:4; 1 John 2:15-17.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 3rd, 2007, 5:06 pm #14

Don't you have better things to argue about? Every genre of Christian music has songs of varying quality and reflects the "contemporary" music of the day. Old hymns sound like classical music, since they were written by people with names like Handel and Bach. Songs from the 50's sound like big band. The bass line in "He Bore It All" sounds like trombones on parade. Many of the praise songs of today have a "pop" feel to them. Some of my favorite songs are old hymns. One reason is only the best have survived through the years. A good number of songs we are singing today will be forgotten in a few years. Are there songs today that are too inward focused? I'm sure there are, but the exegesis of the "Strong Tower" song above takes a particularly prejudiced mind to make the case for that one. Modern songs don’t have the monopoly on self centeredness. There are plenty of self focused songs I have memory of growing up. "I'm satisfied with a cottage below...but in that city...I want a gold one that silver lined!" Talk about self centered!

One of the reasons I like many of the praise songs today is because they are God-centered and based straight out of scripture. I could list lyrics to songs such as “Lamb of God” or “Blessed be the Name” that I believe are much more focused on God than pretty much anything I grew up singing in church. But I know it wouldn't do any good. Dr. Bill would try to find some angle to prove that they are really evil and Ken would babble about the Whore of Babylon or Zeus or something. But what I can tell you is that when I was going through an extremely difficult time in my life when my girlfriend was killed in a car wreck while I was driving, I almost gave up on God. The part of church that helped the most wasn't the sound doctrine I heard from the pulpit, or the King James prayers, or the "high church" songs, but it was the praise songs. Whenever I hear the song "Shout to the Lord" even today it brings back memories of that dark time and how I feel God used these songs to get me through. I nearly wore out a Steven Curtis Chapman CD, played his song "Free" probably hundreds of times.

So when I see a post saying "Jehovah doesn't sell" or "Strong Tower" could be a song to Satan, I do chuckle a little when I see how perspective can prejudice your opinion of things. Bill, I still encourage you to travel to a developing country and spend a few weeks using your physician skills in a village where the average salary is a dollar a day. I believe it may change your perspective on what is important and where you spend your energies. I know it has mine.
What does getting through a hard time by listening to praise songs have to do with the fact that songs that omit or downplay the names of Jehovah, God, Jesus, Christ, Holy Spirit, and Savior sell better than those that boldly proclaim those names? Generic songs that downplay anything "religious" naturally sell better than truly strong, Christian songs that boldly tell of the Gospel of Christ and how to be saved by obedience to Him. "Christian" songs that have a hint of romance and sex also sell better than purely "doctrinal" songs. The same applies to the literary industry. Books based on sex and romance sell well. Books based on truth, goodness, and righteous do NOT sell well. Those composing "Christian" songs should have the conviction to proclaim the Gospel boldly and be less concerned with producing that which will fill their pockets with cash. I've also gotten the impression that those who prefer "Christian" songs that lack definitive references to Jehovah, God, Jesus, Christ, Holy Spirit, and Savior do so because they prefer the physical BEAT and the fast or seductive rhythms often present in such songs.

What does getting through a hard time by listening to praise songs have to do with the fact that "Christian" songs that are devoid of much of any real references to Jehovah, God, Jesus, Christ, Holy Spirit, and our Savior can be used by non-Christians, even Satanists, for their own purposes, because the songs are too generic and/or self-centered?

And finally, what does TMP's suggestion that I start practicing medicine in Africa have to do with anthing about "Christian" music? It's like s/he ran out of steam and couldn't find anything else to blow up about, so s/he threw a personal attack.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 5th, 2007, 3:53 am

May 4th, 2007, 12:58 am #15

Good points. If songs that frequently mention the names of Jehovah, God, Jesus, Christ, Holy Spirit, and Savior do not sell well among the general public, then "Christian" artists surmise that songs that downplay "religion" but that incorporate a "romantic" or perhaps even a borderline erotic slant will rake in the big bucks. In other words, sex, even a hint of it, sells.

Yes, if the "Christian" rock music industry wants the world to sit up and take notice, it has to make its "Christian" music more appealing to the world. Romans 12:2; James 4:4; 1 John 2:15-17.
Bill,

Please use your above method an disect this somewhat popular song,

RB


Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

When we've been here ten thousand years -
bright shining as the sun.
We've no less days to sing God's praise -
then when we've first begun.

May be my math, but I only count ONE God reference and may personal pronouns.
Quote
Like
Share

CCRM-Concerned
CCRM-Concerned

May 4th, 2007, 5:11 pm #16

<font face=arial>This song is popular in the religious world. It would rather be strange or out of place to sing it or even perform it with instruments in a night club or social club or dance club. It is for a similar reason that the name of Jehovah does not sell (in this case, “God” is capitalized). And your math is correct—one to reference in the song is quite sufficient.

If this should satisfy as an explanation, not all “hymns” in just any “hymnbook” deserve the merit to be called hymns, either. There are certain so-called “hymns” even in those hymnals published in the brotherhood and used in churches of Christ that do not qualify as “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” that the New Testament would teach—doctrinally speaking. There’s a very good reason that the one who leads or starts songs in the assembly has the responsibility of selecting songs that are doctrinally sound.

Therefore, from that standpoint, it is even more of a serious issue when “songs” are derived from Christian “Rock” musical selections. Having said that, I must confess that I am hopeful that there will be certain ones (not many) from the Christian “Rock” music industries that will be included someday in our hymnbooks—but reservedly because they have passed the biblical screen tests mentioned in the beginning of this thread.</font>
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 4th, 2007, 5:25 pm #17

Bill,

Please use your above method an disect this somewhat popular song,

RB


Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

When we've been here ten thousand years -
bright shining as the sun.
We've no less days to sing God's praise -
then when we've first begun.

May be my math, but I only count ONE God reference and may personal pronouns.
Although "Amazing Grace" suffers from too many personal pronouns, it does mention "grace" quite a few times (hence the appropriate title) and "God" once. That's a considerable improvement over "Srong Tower," which mentions neither "grace" nor "God" (nor or any of His other names) even once. The other attributes mentioned in "Strong Tower" are generic and could apply to virtually any deity. Even pagans often see their kings as gods and their idols as "holy." And those who worship Satan regard him as "King" and "holy."

As far as I can determine, no other religion in the world, not even Satanism, has a doctrine of salvation by grace through faith and obedience as does Christianity. Therefore, a song that definitively mentions God with as many references to His grace as "Amazing Grace" does can only point to Christianity.

The point to remember is that songs that emphasize God, Jesus, Christ, Jehovah, Holy Spirit, and Savior will be more effective evangelistic tools in the long run than songs that passively downplay God. Of course, songs emphasizing God and Christianity may not sell as well as songs that omit His names or that vaguely hint at Christianity. Praising God by definitively addressing Him and winning souls for Christ should be the ultimate objective for writing Christian songs, not in producing whatever it takes to stuff one's pockets with cash.
Quote
Share

Amazed
Amazed

May 4th, 2007, 8:25 pm #18


Oh, this is good. If anyone ever asks me to define "legalism", I will send them to this thread. I posted the lyrics to Strong Tower, a CLEARLY Christian rock song for the purpose of showing that (contrary to the title of this thread) Christian Rock is not Satanic.

A few days later, I check back, and a couple of you "defenders of the faith because God is not strong enough to defend it Himself" have legalistically and inaccurately picked it apart. Your conclusion? "Yep. It's Satanic. Or at least it MIGHT be."

Wow. Only a moron who does not have a hint of Christian education and experience would read those lyrics, or hear that song, and come to that conclusion. I am truly amazed (pardon the pun). I really am.

***For Entertainment Purposes Only***

Dissect this. Yet ANOTHER "Satanic" Christian rock song:


Tree 63- "Look What You've Done For Me"

Look what You've done for me
Your blood has set me free
Jesus my Lord look what You've done for me

I haven't been the same
Ever since that day I called Your name
Yahweh
Yahweh Look What You've done for me

What can I do for You my Lord?
I want You to know my heart is Yours
It's not a question of what You can do for me
But what can I do for You my Lord?

Up to Your cross I crawled
Now I am standing teen feet tall
Jesus my saviour look what You've done for me

Free at last I'm free
I owe You my life completely
Yahweh
Yahweh look what You've done for me

Quote
Share

Ken Sublett
Ken Sublett

May 5th, 2007, 1:39 am #19

<font face=arial>While Christian Rock Music has become one of the major enticements promoted by the Charismatic and Community Church Movements in their church and TV-programmed gatherings—and which undoubtedly has infected not only certain mega churches of Christ but also a number of fundamentalist and conservative church groups—there has also surfaced concerns that if this trend continues, the next and future generations will face a seemingly insurmountable task of determining what is reverential in God’s sight and what the pure gospel message is supposed to convey.

Are we in that group that should be concerned about whereto the Christian “Rock” Music is leading the “Christian” youth of this postmodern era, even certain adult “Christians” with similar tendencies or appellations as do the young Christians?

As the passages in Eph. 5:18,19 and Col. 3:16 clearly emphasize the truth that we “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly” and that we “teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,” do we take such truth to heart or do we let the “rock” music overshadow the truth?

Shouldn’t there be biblical screens that any Christian “rock” music must pass before it can be labeled as “Christian”? Perhaps, the “lyrics” screen would be the easiest form of examination upon which the Christian “rock” music is determined as a failure. What about the “character” screen—in this case, the “attitudes” depicted in the “rock” music and as portrayed by the “performers”? Is it reverential or worshipful; is there any expression of real AWE [not to be confused with the modern definition of the word “awesome”]?

Then, not the least of all and the often ignored “score” screen. Uh-huh! Many will argue that “the arrangement of the musical notes” has nothing to do with passing or failing the “score” screen. Are we prepared to rebut such a notion by stating that while the notes should compliment the words, in no way should the arrangement overshadow the message being conveyed? Otherwise, the “ROCK” music is no longer “Christian”?

Therefore, when the “Contemporary Christian ‘Rock’ Music” fails ANY ONE of the biblical screens, it is or it has become only “Rock” music and Satanic.</font>
First, a thing cannot be Christian unless it is included in "discipling which was to teach the teachings of Jesus Christ." He is the Living Word Who brought the Written Word for our learning and as a MARK to weed out false teachers.

Second, it violates the direct command beginning with the "synagogue" or church in the wilderness, continued for the life of the synagogue, exampled by Jesus, commanded by Jesus in calling the church the EKKLESIA.

It violates the direct command of Paul to "SPEAK" which is opposite to POETRY or POETRY. No poet or musician could even be sent out as a kerusso (preacher) or presbyter to deliver a message from one RULER to another.

It violates the direct command to use THAT WHICH is written defined as SCRIPTURE because Jesus is THE Teacher when we "teach that which has been taught."

It violates the STYLE because "melody as tunefulness belongs to the 19th century" and PSALLO or melody has NO musical connection: it draws the line between the perverted marketplace and the ekklesia so that singers or dancers would be MARKED with a red polluted mark as second class in the ekklesia.

It violates what any simple simon knew who could read for almost 400 years.

It violates the PATRIARCHAL image of God because you did NOT make music to a MALE "god" but ONLY to the goddesses where the "musical worship ministers" were perverted and emasculated: sure, they even did sex change operations to make the minister BRING IN MORE TITHES AND OFFERINGS.

Like ALL of the "music" passages in the whole Bible it says to God: "Shut your face: we WILL NOT hear your words." Your self-praise song PROVES it.

History knew that "only females and effeminate males fell into it" (and came out stinking." One church father noted that if a male sang and played:

He was DRUNK
He was PERVERTED
or He was "just making fun."

I say that the Babylonian "praise singing" involves not-quite males DRUNK ON IGNORANCE, quite happy to wear the PERSONA of a pervert and ALWAYS mocking God just for fun and prophet.

So what do we have? You have the church of the Mother of Harlots (Zoe) who uses music and USES MUSICIANS as SORCERERS who HAD deceived the whole world. Because the TAIL ties back to the head where SATAN the "musical enchanter" DECEIVED Eve in a sexual sense according to Paul.

So, the CIRCLE (Circe or Circus) or church WILL NOT BE BROKEN and Lucifer "the singing and harp playing prostitute" and all He / She / It could seduce will be DRIVEN into the burning pit with WIND, STRING and PERCUSSION instruments.

http://www.piney.com/Isa30LXX.html

It is a PERFECT MATCH for the Abomination of Desolation which brought idolatry, music, sex and homosexuality into the Holy Place as a type of the Church. Under the Jews a singer or musician who entered the Holy Place would be run through with a sword and tossed on the bed of maggots and everlasting fires.

In The Book of Enoch and many parallel accounts, the LAUGHING is a mark of those who having been warned have been seduced by the Cainites into wine, women and song. And having falling, will never get back up as Hebrews 6 etc makes clear.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 5th, 2007, 5:07 am #20

Oh, this is good. If anyone ever asks me to define "legalism", I will send them to this thread. I posted the lyrics to Strong Tower, a CLEARLY Christian rock song for the purpose of showing that (contrary to the title of this thread) Christian Rock is not Satanic.

A few days later, I check back, and a couple of you "defenders of the faith because God is not strong enough to defend it Himself" have legalistically and inaccurately picked it apart. Your conclusion? "Yep. It's Satanic. Or at least it MIGHT be."

Wow. Only a moron who does not have a hint of Christian education and experience would read those lyrics, or hear that song, and come to that conclusion. I am truly amazed (pardon the pun). I really am.

***For Entertainment Purposes Only***

Dissect this. Yet ANOTHER "Satanic" Christian rock song:


Tree 63- "Look What You've Done For Me"

Look what You've done for me
Your blood has set me free
Jesus my Lord look what You've done for me

I haven't been the same
Ever since that day I called Your name
Yahweh
Yahweh Look What You've done for me

What can I do for You my Lord?
I want You to know my heart is Yours
It's not a question of what You can do for me
But what can I do for You my Lord?

Up to Your cross I crawled
Now I am standing teen feet tall
Jesus my saviour look what You've done for me

Free at last I'm free
I owe You my life completely
Yahweh
Yahweh look what You've done for me
My, my. Amazed drips with hateful sarcasm and calls us "morons" because we knocked down "Strong Tower," a song that could use much improvement because it neglects God by name and is much too self-centered. If Amazed auditioned for American Idol and got knocked down there, I could just imagine him exploding at the judges as some of the other kids do in a tizzy of childish, immature sarcasm: "Only morons who don't have a hint of musical education and experience..."

Amazed apparently can't see the real difference between the lyrics to "Strong Tower," which is self-centered and doesn't mention God even once, and the lyrics to "Look What You've Done for Me." Although the latter lyrics still manifest the "Me Me Me" attitude of a self-centered generation, they are actually better overall than "Strong Tower," because they at least mention Jesus, Savior, Yahweh, and the cross. Does Amazed think that is "satanic"?
Quote
Share