Historically speaking, I have always held a fairly consistent view when it comes to musical morality. Growing up, I was exposed to a wide range of music, so nothing really bothered me when I converted. I did, of course, have to discard the more carnal songs I was fond of as an unbeliever, and gradually worked up to rejecting even purportedly Christian songs that contained foul language, but I established my view fairly early on that it is lyrical content, not musical style, that affects musical morality. Setting lyrics aside, I would never have said any music was superior or inferior. I would have chalked it all down to personal taste.
Recently, however, my mind was changed by a preacher I am particularly fond of by the name of Todd Friel. His ministry, Wretched Radio, published a short clip on the topic of metal music. In the short clip, Todd made the case that the tune of a song is as important as the lyrical content. If the tune does not accurately represent God, can it really be considered appropriate?
I have heard a similar argument presented in the past, but never quite as eloquently as Todd put it in the clip. That being said, I think I drew the opposite conclusion to what he appears to have wanted. While I would never have said metal music is superior to certain hymns in the past, I now sincerely believe it is (where lyrically appropriate, of course).
But I feel this new view of mine needs to be refined and clarified. I can't just run around saying "metal music is better than some classical hymns", after all. And so, first of all, I would simply like to tweak Todd's point a little. In his view, as I understand it, "music speaks", and so even set apart from lyrical content, music must fit God. But as I pointed out in my previous response, it actually never can. Because music is in no way codified, a purely instrumental piece by both a well-meaning Christian and the proudest of sinners would not be easily distinguished. Even the harp, which Todd specifically mentioned, would not feel out of place in certain sinful situations, including some I myself have found myself in (let it not be said Christ went to the cross for nothing). Thus, I contend, the lyrical content is still what matters most, but the tune, rather than being made to fit God, should fit the content of the song.
As I pointed out in the original article, God is not a one dimensional being. Just as we, who bear His image, are capable of experiencing and expressing a range of emotions, so also is God able to perfectly experience and express a range of emotions. The God of peace is surely pleased with peaceful tracks, but can the "man of sorrows" (Isaiah 53:3) not also experience sorrow? The Lord rejoices, and calls on us to make a joyful noise, but are we not also relying on His power to fight in His spiritual war?
This great range of emotions and attributes is easily seen in the Psalms. Just as we do today, the Psalmists expressed all sorts of joys and sorrows, praises and lamentations, love and anger. We have plenty of "His steadfast love endures forever" (Psalm 136), but what are we to make of "Happy the one who takes and dashes Your little ones against the rock!" (Psalm 137:9)? Somehow, I can't imagine Psalm 137 being sung aloud in church on a Sunday morning (though as it is Scripture, I hope it is at least read and addressed). Nevertheless, I do not imagine joy is the theme here.
Nor do I imagine Psalm 88 is particularly joyful. In fact, this Psalm is anomalous in that while most Psalms at least contain hints of hope, Psalm 88 rests on the author's despondency. Apart from the opening, "O Lord, God of my salvation", there is nothing pleasant in this Psalm. Heman actually believes himself afflicted by God, ignored even. He believes his death is near, his despair is overwhelming him, he cries out but sees no answer.
It seems absurd, then, to suggest that the chief musician would have put this to a happy tune. Certainly, he would not have put it to the as then non-existent metal style either, but I can't imagine a better style for it. In fact, I have often said my personal favorite song, Skillet's "Out of Hell", reminds me very much of this Psalm. Lyrically, it reads a lot like a prayer of despondency; a reliance on God in troubles that have not yet subsided. A total reliance on God. "I need you because no one else can get me out get me out of Hell".
No. One. Else.
And so is this song inappropriate? I would say no. Lyrically, it is theologically sound. Situationally, it wouldn't be ideal for a Sunday service, but in one's personal life? Why not? If Heman cannot be condemned for Psalm 88, how can Skillet be judged for Out of Hell? But what about the tune? Does this fit God? To answer this, simply consider the song itself. The song indisputably fits God. But a "traditional" hymn kind of tune would absolutely not fit. Consider the attached video.
I apologise for my abysmal singing, and promise it will only happen once more in this article, but focus on the tune. Ask, does this seem even remotely appropriate for the situation at hand? I would say absolutely not. The theme of the song is emotional turmoil, so should the tune really be "church appropriate"? Far from it! The tune should reflect the song!
Of course, the flip side of that is songs which do focus on joy. Take, for example, "To God Be The Glory". When I first sung this song in church, I quite liked it, so I looked it up online later. But the tune I found did not match the tune I'd learned. It seems the song itself is old, or at the very least some choir or other has set it to an old-style tune. The result was repugnant to me, so much so that I never looked it up again. But I did attempt to imitate it in this video:
Now, I don't know about you, but when I sing praises to the Lord, and encourage people to rejoice, I like to sound like I am praising the Lord and rejoicing. I don't want to sound like I just rolled out of bed and didn't even have time for a cup of coffee! I don't want to sound like I just spent a month in hospital and am slowly recovering from painful surgery! If I'm going to sing "let the people rejoice", I want it to be in a tune that sounds joyful. But older hymns just don't do that for me.
Nor indeed do they do it for many people, particularly those outside the faith. Now of course, we can't really base anything on their opinions. To them, praising God in any tune seems repugnant. But which is better; to annoy them with good music, or to reinforce their stereotypes and give them one more excuse to go out and have their fun in Satan's territory?
And should we not at least attempt to cater to seekers? Many conversion stories these days feature some kind of musical influence. Skillet alone have brought many to the faith through their music. Wolves at the Gate, my other favorite band, frequently feature prominent Gospel presentations in their songs. If "Christianity is boring, I'd have to give up so much" is the sole barrier to faith, or indeed if it is a barrier at all, should we not remove it where appropriate? Especially if we're going to argue, as Todd Friel and his ilk do, that presentation is as important as the message. Will they maybe accept the same message in a more tasteful wrapping paper?
In the end, I maintain my old position that no style of music is actually evil. Music is, and will always remain, amoral. In fact, I would go this far and say that if the English language was to perish tomorrow, Babel style, even music that was once immoral, being now unintelligible and devoid of discernible meaning, would cease to contain any sin. But I have now officially changed my view on the implications. I now firmly believe that some tracks are objectively better than others. I do not believe tunes themselves should, or even potentially could, fit God, but I do believe they should fit the lyrical content. In the end, if the lyrical content fits God, and the tune fits the lyrical content, the tune fits God. If, by contrast, the tune does not fit the lyrical content, the tune cannot fit God. Therefore, though many old hymns are theologically accurate, the simple fact that the tune does not evoke the emotional content of the lyrics makes them almost inappropriate for worship.
It is, therefore, my new contention that metal music, which is almost universally applied to songs about God's power or wrath, or about personal struggles, or about spiritual warfare, is vastly superior to the dull and one dimensional tunes that certainly do not present the joy or praise the lyrics tend to present. I still maintain that it all comes down to personal preference; worship music should always remain as personal as the worship itself. I would not seek to compel a brother to listen to, sing along with, or even tolerate a song they do not like, nor would I forbid them to sing that which they do like. But when push comes to shove, God has range, and so we, who are made in His image, have every right to express that range. Some styles just do that a little better than others.