Music, the Beat, and Moral Neutrality...............Thunderhead

Last time we began to examine the question, "Is music morally neutral?" We focused on whether or not emotions can be sinful alone. Now we turn our attention to the beat, and the claim that certain rhythmic patterns are inherently sinful. Variations on this argument range from the thoughtful to the ridiculous.

Some arguments are based on the supposed superiority of specific rhythmic emphases found in the Western music of the past few centuries. I will only make two brief points about such claims. First, arguments like these find no support in scripture, direct or indirect. Second, these arguments deny the contribution and value of music produced by non-Western cultures. We dare not ascribe to God opinions He does not ascribe to Himself. Other arguments revolve around two issues: the origin of the beat, and its effect on the mind and body. One book on the topic of music quotes rock and roll artist Little Richard as saying, "I believe this kind of music [rock and roll] is demonic ... A lot of the beats in music today are taken from voodoo, from the voodoo drums." In his book "Face the Music," Leonard Seidel suggests, "To declare that [Africans] are the only roots of rock music is to mislead and to be less than honest ... However, to deny that an African connection to the rock rhythms of our day exists is to be equally misleading and dishonest. To declare that a certain rhythm or beat is 'evil' cannot be proved entirely. What is far more important is the historical revelation that demonic activity has been observed in connection with rituals where drums and rhythmic beats have been the catalyst." I would agree with his admission that "to declare a certain rhythm or beat is 'evil' cannot be proved entirely." It is an instance of guilt-by-association, as if someone were suggesting that perfume be banned because men have been seduced by women wearing perfume. But let's suppose that guilt-by-association really is a valid way to discredit a particular musical beat. Then what about Jubal from Genesis 4? Jubal was the father of all who play the lyre and pipe, but he was also a direct descendent of Cain (the first murderer) and his father was Lamech (who bragged that he was 77 times more evil than Cain). With the "father of music" having relatives likes that, wouldn't all music be considered polluted? Even more to the point, Old Testament scholar Ronald B. Allen tells us that the ancient Israelites borrowed not only pagan instruments to worship God, but used pagan musical forms and patterns. This was done purposefully to debunk Baal and exalt the true God! ("Worship Leader Magazine," June/July 1992, vol. 1, No. 3, p. 5) History has proven again and again that every generation is faced with the challenge of using new sounds, new instruments, and yes, new beats to glorify the One for whom they exist.

But what about the effect of the beat on the body and mind? Isn't that proof that music is not morally neutral?

It depends on what effects we're talking about. What we're asking is, "Can music make someone sin?" The answer is a definitive NO. But music does affect us emotionally. Next time we'll look at some of the reasons why. ~Crosswalk.com

~Thunderhead

Show all stories by   Author:  15033 ( Click here )