Home » Posts tagged 'Thomas Jefferson'
Tag Archives: Thomas Jefferson
Music Style Isn’t a Christian Liberty
Music Has Meaning and It Is Moral or Immoral
One could argue that musicians are the most popular people in the world. Three of the most followed people on instagram are musicians, four of the top ten on twitter (X). Rick Warren in his Purpose Driven Church book says that choice of music style for a church is the biggest, most important determiner of the numerical growth of the church. If musical style matters so much to people in the world, how is it that it really means nothing as many in the church address it with importance? Of course, music, not just the words, mean something. Through various passages, scripture indicates this.
Music itself communicates and almost anyone and everyone in their heart of hearts know this. They know it like “self-evident” truth. In this post, I’m not going to try to prove that, because I’ve done it so many times before. Several very good arguments from scripture and then ones based upon natural law say that music has objective meaning, like words or a language. It can in itself communicate something moral or immoral. It is not amoral. This is why even rock musicians call just their music itself “sexy.” Can music be sexy? Yes. Everyone knows that, and if they do not, its just because they’re not thinking about it at all.
If musical style can be immoral, it can be sinful.
Christians Have Liberty
I believe in Christian liberty. Paul argues for it in 1 Corinthians 6-10. That section of 1 Corinthians helps someone understand what is a liberty.
The Apostle Paul uses several words to communicate liberty, the word “liberty” one of them (7:39, 8:9, 10:29). He also says, “lawful” (6:12–twice, 10:23–twice) and “power” (9:4, 5, 6, 12–twice). Actually, “liberty” and “power” translate the same Greek word (exousia, 8:9, 9:4). If you look at BDAG, the premier lexicon, the usage of exousia is a “freedom of choice” or “right.” The word “right” isn’t in the King James Version of 1 Corinthians 6-10, but Paul uses exousia like that, even though it has several other types of uses.
So let’s ask a question using the term, “right.” Does a Christian have the right to listen to any type of musical style? Or perhaps a couple other different kind of questions. Does a Christian have the right to use whatever musical style he wants for worship? And, does a Christian have the right to allow for another Christian to listen to whatever musical style he wants or another church to use whatever musical style it wants for worship?
Musical Style Is Not a Christian Liberty
I’m saying that music style isn’t a Christian liberty. To prove that, I have to understand what is a Christian liberty, or put the way I’ve discussed, I have to understand the rights of a Christian. “Rights” are a popular subject, especially whether human rights or civil rights.
Thomas Jefferson maybe more than anyone made “rights” a popular subject. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson mentions the Creator endowing all men with certain inalienable rights. The way he uses the term in the Declaration is close to how Paul uses exousia in some of the cases in 1 Corinthians, especially chapter 9, when he says he and others have the right to marry or the right to forbear working. The King James Version says “power” and not “right,” but that’s what Paul meant.
No One Has Liberty To Sin
Liberty in 1 Corinthians 6-10 relates to the grace of God. With how Paul writes and talks, he might ask if grace gives someone liberty to sin. He does ask that very question in Romans 6:1. Is grace about the freedom to do what we want to do, essentially to do what we desire, what someone might describe as what we lust after? Believers don’t have the right to sin. It might be a legal right based on secular laws, but God didn’t and does not give anyone the right to sin.
Jefferson said that God gives men rights. Sin isn’t one of them though.
Based on the application of many different verses of scripture, playing or involvement with a certain style of music is sin. Even choosing to listen to those styles is sin. Furthermore, the playing or involvement with a certain style of music can violate guidelines for Christian liberty.
More to Come
A Useful Exploration of Truth about Christian Nationalism
Probing Christian Nationalism
The mainstream media now uses the words “Christian nationalism” as a political cudgel against Republicans. Rob Reiner, the former “meathead” of Archie Bunker fame produced a documentary against his caricature of “Christian nationalism.” The left labels new Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, a “Christian Nationalist.” This last week, Politico writer, Heidi Przybyla, made news herself with this statement on television, attacking Christian Nationalism:
The thing that unites them as Christian nationalists, not Christians because Christian nationalists are very different, is that they believe that our rights as Americans and as all human beings do not come from any Earthly authority. They don’t come from Congress, from the Supreme Court, they come from God. . . . The problem with that is that they are determining, men, are determining what God is telling them.
Apparently this is news on the left, that people believe that rights come from God. This was, of course, found in the Declaration of Independence (1776) by the apparently Christian Nationalist, Thomas Jefferson:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Not long ago in 2018, professing conservative commentator, Jonah Goldberg, wrote something akin to Przybyla in National Review:
Let’s begin with some somewhat unusual assertions for these pages.
Capitalism is unnatural. Democracy is unnatural. Human rights are unnatural. God didn’t give us these things, or anything else. We stumbled into modernity accidentally, not by any divine plan.
Christian Discussion of Christian Nationalism
As much as the left picks Christian Nationalism as a talking point, Christians are discussing it. Here are important books in the debate:
The Case for Christian Nationalism, by Stephen Wolfe
Citizens & Exiles: Christian Faithfulness in God’s Two Kingdoms, by Scott Aniol
Also several have written many articles on Christian Nationalism, both pro and con. I understand the rise of the terminology. I’ve written posts here with a consideration of Christian Nationalism, but the very idea of consideration drew fierce opposition for even broaching the subject. Never have I said I agreed with Christian Nationalism. However, I have questions that did not and do not relate to the popularization of the concept of Christian Nationalism.
Basis For Considering Christian Nationalism
My questions and then thoughts, perhaps answers, arise from the following.
One
One, the first amendment of the Bill of Rights and to the United States Constitution guarantees religious freedom. The first sentence of the Bill of Rights starts with this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Analysis sees two clauses: (1) no establishment of state religion, and (2) free exercise of religion. I contend there is already the establishment of a state religion and that free exercise is at least abridged. The latter proceeds from the former. I like saying, “If there is a state religion, then it matters which one.” There is a state religion and it is against God, not even for God. Everyone does already subjugate to the anti-God state religion.
Two
Two, if the United States functions according to God-given rights, then it should not ignore the one and true God. All truth comes from God and it is a lie when the state will not acknowledge this. Going back to number one, it is a religion that rejects this, not neutrality.
The vacuum from great desire not to establish state religion acquiesces to false state religion. God is truth. The Bible is truth. The one God and His Word, the Bible, are not some tier of religion, which is separate from reality. This is our Father’s world. A nation cannot and will not function according to truth and laws without the acknowledgment of the true God.
Three
Three, God wants application of His Word to everything. The Bible is sufficient. God wants application of scripture to employment, to culture, to art, to government, yes, to everything and everywhere. To occur, this must be open, welcome, and purposeful. It should not be a process incessantly hidden or camouflaged, so as not to reveal its occurrence. Let God be God.
Four
Four, free exercise requires openness in conversation about everything in God’s Word. It requires quoting scripture like scripture is in fact authority. This means saying, we’re going to do this because God wants us to. God founded government. It isn’t matter and motion. Truly discussing rights, since they do come from God, requires including God in the discussion.
Opening the Can of Worms
I believe I can give more than the above four, but that’s enough to percolate thinking and expressing on this matter. The closing of the Constitution of the United States does not mean the end of discussion on the Constitution. It is not inspired. It is not God’s Word. Did it fail in the first amendment and really throughout the Constitution because of that failure?
Before the completion of the United State Constitution, Hamilton and Madison spent hundreds of pages discussing these ideas. Did that yield a perfect masterpiece? Is any kind of correction over? Questioning it is not akin to challenging the Word of God. I believe it is just the opposite. The Bible requires someone to prove it and even go back to the drawing board.
More to Come
Recent Comments