Part One     Part Two     Part Three

This series, now in part four, mixes two true aspects of the perpetual worship of a believer that reinforces the proposition that musical style is not a Christian liberty.  The first is the individual worship that takes up the entire life of a believer.  He does all to the glory of God, and since musical style can be sinful, it is not a Christian liberty.  The second surely is even more plain, that is, God regulates musical style used in corporate worship.  God rejected how Nadab and Abihu worshiped and killed them for it (Leviticus 10:1-2).

People who want to keep musical style neutral and amoral, so they can listen to and use whatever they want, I would surmise, wriggle with discomfort over the example of Nadab and Abihu.  They also might not like thinking about Uzzah, whom God killed for touching the ark of the covenant when men did not carry the ark in the proper manner.  This also goes all the way back to the way of Cain (Genesis 4), who offered God something different than what God wanted.  God rejected it.

Liberty, Lust, and Idolatry

Christian liberty itself is not about someone getting what he wants.  In the entire section of 1 Corinthians 6-10 on Christian liberty, Paul says someone might have permission, but that alone doesn’t make it right.  He shows this in many different ways.  One of them out of the many, which are all very clear, is that even getting close to something can result in a fall (1 Corinthians 10:1-14).  “Flee idolatry” and “flee fornication” are both commands.  Even if someone is not committing either of those, they require fleeing by God.

Jesus’ half-brother James talks about this same type of thought, action, or attitude in chapters 3-4.  In 3:15, James says that the wisdom that is not from above is “earthly, sensual, devilish.”  This characterizes a lot of musical style, one or more of those three.  A believer will not embrace a wisdom that is not from above.

James 4 keeps this going when he addresses prayers (vv. 1-3) to consume someone’s own lust.  Someone doesn’t even have liberty to pray lustful prayers, which relates to how someone prays.  Later in the chapter, someone may do something completely permissible — buy or sell (do commerce) — and even in that, he must consider and do first what God wants, not his self.  That’s whether it’s right or not.  Life isn’t about getting what you want, including musical style.

Paul, Peter, and Lust

Lust is prominent in the battle against what God wants.  Who is in charge?  Him or us?  According to the Apostle Paul, this is a regular allegiance challenge even according to a principle of life, such as a natural law, like gravity (Romans 7:14-25).  With whatever a believer may do that is good, which is entirely only within the character or attributes of God, Paul says a law operates in his body parts, his flesh.  This is part of the curse or human fallenness.  The flesh repulses what is characteristic of God.  It wants what it wants and will rebel.

The musical styles of the world favor flesh and lust.  Believers don’t have liberty there.  They are required to flee where this tendency to idolatry occurs.  It is why scripture commands according to Peter (1 Peter 2:12):  “Abstain from fleshly lust.”  Fleshly lust is not good.  It is not fleeing idolatry.  Believers aren’t supposed to be coming close.  They are to be staying away from that.

Musical Style and Separation

Since musical style is not a Christian liberty and can be sinful, it also requires separation.  Not getting close is staying away from.  This is also part of honoring God, not bringing what displeases God into closer proximity, which is being holy as God is holy (1 Peter 1:16-18).

People, churches, and their leaders want you to accept their musical style.  They want you to ignore it, just take it in stride.  At least, their music is neutral, if not someone else’s.  Church leaders will label their musical style acceptable and even superior because some history of acceptance exists.

I’ve noticed, like almost anything else for men, the more acceptance there is, the more of the thing accepted.  This shows the importance of rejecting and separating.  It helps rid the worldly or fleshly style.

Bad Effects of Not Separating Over Musical Style

As musical style has become less and less of an issue, to almost nothing, more worldly and fleshly styles grow and spread.  In a personal way, I’ve had less influence in my “circles” in the last three or four years for various reasons.  Immediately upon my absence, fleshly musical styles grew.  My opinion is that they never did want the holiness or separation of musical style, as seen in the sudden change and acceptance.  I’m not sure other people observed this, but I did.  This is an issue.

For all of my adult life, I’ve had to weigh how to deal with the worldly and fleshly musical styles of those with whom I participate or associate.  I’ve looked at it as a matter of trajectory.  If they seemed to improve, get better, or more holy, then I followed the trajectory.  They were doing better.  Now that I see some going the opposite, fleshly and worldly, or more Charismatic, revivalistic, or ecstatic, this isn’t acceptable, but what should someone, what should I, do?  Put up with it?  Go with the flow?  What do you think?

Part of going the opposite direction is putting pressure on the one with the stand to capitulate.  Sadly, most people like the reversal or poor direction.  They like it because it gives greater latitude.  Fleshly, worldly musical style is also pragmatic, so it rewards in that way the person who uses it.  The leader can claim a superiority with the so-called success.  He’s liked by more people, can manipulate more people, and this rewards his fleshliness and worldliness.  The leader points to this popularity like it is a vote.  He’s got more votes for his new direction.

More to Come