Today, I want to talk to you about weaker brethren, doubtful disputations, and eisegesis. Notice the above picture. It contains a meme I found while browsing Facebook that attempts to push the narrative that basically any music outside of "traditional" hymns have no place in the Church.
First, let's address the issue of musical morality head on. Are Christians allowed to worship using new styles of music? Of course, those who use more traditional styles have to acknowledge that yes, we are. After all, their hymns were also once brand new. Amazing Grace is recognised as one of history's greatest hymns, and yet I guarantee you, such lyrics never left the lips of the Apostles. They didn't speak English, and they died long before John Newton was born. The song was written in 1772, and published in 1779. Before that, Amazing Grace didn't exist.
We can do this with every traditional hymn on the books. If you're singing a song in English, you are singing a new song. It's just older than other, newer songs. So, what was the justification for this? Simple: The Bible is flooded with not only permission, but almost a command to sing new songs. We have verses like Psalm 33:3, which is one of many verses in which we find the phrase "Sing unto him a new song; play skilfully with a loud noise." (Emphasis mine). Psalm 150 openly encourages using a range of instruments not often seen in many churches, with verse 4 even being open ended enough to say "...praise him with stringed instruments...", which, of course, would include the guitar. What's most astonishing is that King David praised God with a sistrum! (2 Samuel 6:5).
A sistrum is especially interesting. Personally, I've never seen one, in church or out. Outside of a Youtube video, this thing is completely alien to me. But when I heard about it, I looked it up, and it turns out, not only is it an Egyptian instrument, but it was actually explicitly used in worship of the goddess Hathor, whose image can often be found on the handles. I strongly doubt Israeli sistrums also depicted the idol, but they used them in praise of God, and this is implied as a good thing.
The message of the Bible is thus extremely clear: God does not care about your music. He does not care if you prefer traditional styles, new styles, or a mix of both, because to ironically quote Dan Lucarini (one of many who opposes Contemporary Christian Music as if it's some kind of cult), "it's not about the music".
Of course, that being said, this applies both ways. I don't have to hate rock music, but you also don't have to like it. In the Bible, there is the concept of "doubtful disputations". Doubtful disputations are moral issues that are, in a sense, negotiable. They are personal moral choices intended to be entirely between a man and his God. Food, drink, and festivities (which, needless to say, naturally include music) are all things which ought never divide the Church. The Bible follows the logic that all things not explicitly forbidden are implicitly allowed. This can be seen in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, which says that the Bible thoroughly equips us for every good work. In other words, if there is a work the Bible doesn't thoroughly equip you for, it isn't good.
With regard to doubtful disputations, the Church is categorised by "stronger" and "weaker" brethren. The stronger brethren tend to embrace the liberties they have in Christ, being responsible in their use, but nevertheless enjoying the things God gave us to enjoy. Weaker brethren tend to be more restrictive in one area or more, even in many cases to the point of being offended by liberty. In this case, it's interesting that the Bible places the burden on the stronger brother. Paul, for example, claimed that he would rather become a vegetarian than cause a weaker brother to stumble (1 Corinthians 8:13). In other words, yes, Christians are allowed to enjoy whatever style of music we want, but if we are aware of the presence of a fellow Christian who is not yet strong enough in the faith to appreciate this, we must forego that liberty, even permanently if it becomes a serious problem.
With that out of the way, let us turn to the meme and see if its logic holds up. We've already seen that it is flat out wrong on the morality of music, but what about its reasoning? Is it true that non-traditional music fits nasty scenes, yet traditional music does not? In truth, no. Music has the advantage of lacking inherent meaning. To give music meaning, you must add meaningful lyrics. Swap the lyrics, the morality changes. Take, for example, Be Thou My Vision. This is a beloved hymn that actually wasn't translated into English until about 1912. Imagine swapping out the lyrics. "Be Thou My Vision" is a beautiful hymn, but change just one word, it becomes an abomination. "Be Thou My Stripper". Suddenly, I don't think it's appropriate for church anymore...
What's more is that Christian songs of any genre do not fit strip clubs, brothels, gambling dens etc. Why? Put simply, it's because when you're sinning, you don't want a constant reminder "Jesus is watching you...". I actually remember one time in college during the early days of my faith. I got into a rap artist called Lecrae, and I would listen to him while waiting for class to start. One of my atheistic classmates came up to me and said "you don't half listen to some religious crap". This guy was by no means against rap. He and his friends were into all sorts of weird music. Yet, hearing "Don't Waste Your Life", in which we hear lyrics like "Paul said if Christ ain't resurrected we wasted our lives, well that implies our life's built around Jesus being alive", he decided it was worth voicing his disgust.
We can play that game all day. What sort of strip club would play "Jesus be Glorified" by Skillet while some poor woman dances for a bunch of perverts? What sort of gambling den would play "Stranger" by Holy Soldier while Stinky Pete marks his cards? You won't find Wolves at the Gate on any playlist in any brothel ever, because they spit out lyrics like "The Father of grace and mercy, has poured out His wrath completely, on His Son for our sake we are free, He brought the Lamb to slaughter". And that, my brethren, is not a truth sinners like to hear while they're sleeping around, cheating each other, beating each other senseless etc. It just doesn't work, because the morality of music does not depend on the music itself, but who uses it for what purpose.
Which brings me to my final point: Beware eisegesis. Eisegesis is when we start with an opinion and try to force that opinion into the Bible. This is exactly what this meme does. Notice earlier, while discussing the morality of music, I showed clear and explicit Scriptures that discuss the very topic I was addressing. These Scriptures leave little room for interpretation. Furthermore, note how you can make a compelling Biblical case against the sinful things in the meme from the Bible. I can show you where the Bible condemns stripping, I can show you where it condemns prostitution, I can show you where it condemns drunkenness and other lewd acts. I can't specifically think of where the Bible might condemn gambling, but I can at least show you where the Bible says we ought to be good, wise stewards, which frankly is close enough. I can show you where the Bible says all of these things, because it does say these things. Compare that to the verses cited in the meme. James 4:4 and Ephesians 5:11. Do either of these verses oppose non-traditional music? Let's have a look.
"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4). By sheer coincidence, I actually wrote about this verse just before I found the meme. Note how music is never mentioned in it. As I explained in the other article, James 4:4 actually talks about not allowing sin to come between us and God. Ephesians 5:11 likewise states "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."
Note how neither of these verses say non-traditional music is sinful, or has no place in the Church. Rather, the meme assumes these things are sinful before citing verses that basically say "don't sin". You can read the Bible forwards, backwards, or upside down. You can ask weaker brethren for all the proof texts they can offer. You can walk up to Dan Lucarini himself and promise him you will immediately renounce CCM if he can just provide you with one explicit Scripture that says it's wrong. My brethren, such a verse does not exist. God doesn't care. He isn't sitting in Heaven disapproving of your favorite worship songs, He's just enjoying the fact that you worship Him. He is the important element. Therefore, if you want to worship Him with rock, hip hop, rap, country, reggae (I know that's not in this specific meme, but I know it's not especially popular with weaker brethren either), go for it. Don't wave it in a weaker brother's face and you're fine, but don't let them judge you either. And to the weaker brethren, for goodness sake, stop making up rules that don't exist and trying to bind other people to them.