00:00
00:00
00:01
Transcript
1/0
Well, we come tonight to part
two of our investigation weighing hip-hop and rap. We saw two weeks
ago what hip-hop stands for and where it has come from. We have
seen the unacceptability of non-Christian hip-hop for the Christian due
to the ungodly lifestyle it holds up for admiration. We have seen
the entry of hip-hop into the Christian church. and in particular
noted its take up by the new Calvinists. Then we observed
the performance and entertainment element that is mixed with the
proclamation of truth. We question the use of performance
and entertainment for which people are applauded to convey the gospel
and spiritual truth. We even more question this in
the light of the fact that the cultural props employed are from
a world that is opposed to the truth. Those considerations should
give pause for thought to those who perform this material and
those who listen to it or in any way consume it. But now we
come to the music itself. As we've already seen, the music
is part of a whole style that we call hip-hop. The dress codes,
the way of speaking, and the general style of cool saturate
the marketing of the people in the genre. Out of that style
has arisen the music itself. The pattern of this works both
ways. The music is cool because the people who make it are cool.
In turn, the people are cool because the music they produce
is cool. The elements of the whole package
work together. People consume all or part of
this package. So, what do we find in Christian
rap music? Well, not surprisingly, we find
the same elements that characterize rap out there on the street. It is not divorced from the non-Christian
genre. There is the same rapid-fire
delivery. One of its exponents puts out
180 words per minute. This is quite impressive and
remarkable. Some of the reform rap artists
have actually come to the attention of the non-Christian rappers
who have admired this skill. So there is the quick-fire mode
of delivery. Of course, the content is devoid
of the sexual matters and approval of taking drugs. But there is
the same aggressive style. It may be toned down, but it
is still present. It is an aggressive and violent
sounding music. That comment holds true irrespective
of how theological and elevated the content might be. It is given
in a height and aggressive style. Then there is the same heavy
beat. It is a little quieter, but it
is relentless. There is the use of the drums
or the drum machine driving it along. The beat urges people,
when in the concert setting, to move to the music. The instrumentation
relies on bass for its effect and helps to produce, as required,
the staccato and stuttering rhythm. Again, it is toned down compared
to the non-Christian variety, but it belongs to the same family.
There are also the same scratching and screeching effects when the
music jumps around. The promotional videos do not
have quite the same booming sounds, but when one looks at some of
the performances, these are definitely loud. There are not the breakdancers,
though some do have dance stage acts. The graffiti is absent,
although some do film their videos on the graffiti-lined streets,
thus staying in touch with one of hip-hop's maxims of keeping
it real. The Christian rap singer is sometimes
restrained in movement, although their stage presence is sustained
by some rocking around or more athletic movements. The audience
is not necessarily so restrained, and hips move to the irresistible
beat. Hip-hop was designed to make
people dance. It may not always be so wild
in the Christian gatherings, but it is the same kind of dancing
as could be seen in a nightclub or in some definitely secular
setting. So those listening, however much
they are moved by the words, are most certainly moved by the
rhythm and the beat. Syncopated sounds, backbeat,
and all the tricks of the trade are on display. So it is appropriate
to raise the question here about the acceptability of different
kinds of music. Isn't the music just neutral?
Isn't it simply musical notation and sound without any inherently
right or wrong about it? Indeed, isn't it simply a matter
of taste and culture? Isn't it something we can redeem
from the culture and refit as a vehicle for evangelism and
teaching? This is what many would have us believe. And they try
to make us feel very guilty or judgmental or critical if we
should question their choice or taste. But is it more than
taste? Does the style of some music
make it unsuitable for worship or use in a Christian setting?
In a way, the effect of the music in its own cultural setting answers
the question for us about suitability of hip hop. The music is undeniably
sensual. Its purpose is to make people
dance and move in ways that emphasize aggression and energetic sexuality. It is designed to express one's
own aggressive power and sexuality and communicate this to other
people. The music is a stimulant to the casting off of restraint
and modesty. It speaks up the loss of inhibitions
and speaks down modesty and self-control. Of course, in Christian meetings,
things never get quite out of hand. There is no over-the-top
indulgence there, and there is no gross sin. But it is the music
whose sound and motion is that of aggression, power, twisted
self-esteem, sin, and sinful appetites. It is the music for
the unleashing of desire and the aggressive expression of
power. It is the music for the downgrading
of self-control and the casting away of godly thoughts. It is
difficult to imagine these performances being conducted without the mood-enhancing
accoutrements such as darkness, and something is lost when the
people are sitting in pews under conditions of normal ambient
light. Without the ability of feeling something of what you
would feel as a nightclub, and being able to move, at least
in some small measure, like one would in that setting, the appeal
of rap would be significantly reduced. If the ability to shout
out and clap was denied the participant, as well as the opportunity to
cheer the celebrity rapper, something of the occasion is lost. Chemistry
that makes Christian hip-hop work is related to the same chemistry
that makes non-Christian hip-hop work. The music then is not neutral. Whether the Christian or non-Christian
variety, it is designed to produce the same pleasurable experiences
and moods. Those who began the genre knew
what they were producing and employed their subtle skills
to maximize the emotional responses they were looking for. They wanted
people to dance. And that purpose is carried forward
inevitably, irrespective of whether the words are a distillation
of systematic theology, a proclamation of reformed truth, a recital
of the periodic table, or a rehearsal of today's shipping forecast.
The words are irrelevant. The music is telling you to feel
and to do something. The music wins out whatever the
words say. Considering the appropriateness,
or otherwise, of particular kinds of music for worship, Scott Anuel,
a writer in America, makes this observation, and I quote him.
Because the very nature of worship is spiritual response to truth,
the music used should develop deep affections for God, not
simply emotional passions. Those affections will result
from the way the text is written, as well as the composition of
the music itself. If the text has no solid, concrete
basis for the music, and if the musical style communicates emotional,
sentimental feelings, it is not appropriate for congregational
worship." End that quote there. The music has its language and
power to produce feelings whatever the words say. Rap is able to
generate sensual and aggressive feelings. It is not helpful. Here is Dan Lucarini, who, having
been in the contemporary Christian worship movement, saw through
it and now warns against it. Though his particular critique
was aimed at rock and roll, hip-hop also meets the criteria for his
comments. And this is what he has to say.
CCM embraces many different contemporary music styles with a heavily syncopated
beat, such as soft rock, smooth jazz, rap and pop rock. But the father of them all is
rock and roll. Rock and roll is a musical style
that was created for immoral purposes by immoral men and has
always been used by the world to express its immoral attitudes
and song. Be honest with yourself as I
have. We prefer it because we like the beat, the driving rhythms. Rock music and its offspring
have the power to make our flesh and our minds do something."
End of that quote. He suggests that what it is making
us do is tied to the old nature. I quote him again. Christians
still have a sinful nature, the old man, that constantly competes
against our new spirit-filled nature. Rock music is an example
of a former conduct that fulfills the desires of the flesh and
mind and feeds the old man that grows corrupt according to deceitful
lusts. When it comes to the desires
of our flesh, we're supposed to put them off, not put them
on. We're supposed to starve the
old man, not continue to feed him. Let me quote Scott Anuel
again. Listening to music is like hanging
around with people. Just like people's moods and
morals rub off on those who keep company with them, so the emotions
and moods communicated by music rub off on people who listen
to it. Therefore, bad music ruins good morals. As Christians, we
must avoid all kinds of communication that are corrupt. This includes
sinful words of lyrics and sinful emotions of music. I end that
quote there. So the music is not neutral.
That is also the verdict of those who have been at the forefront
of promoting rock and roll. They are not blind to what they
are doing. Mick Jagger of the Rolling Stones is reported to
have said this. I quote him. Ours is a group
with built-in hate. We communicate aggression and
frustration to an audience musically and visually. That's the end
of his quote there. You notice that he did not mention
the words. It is the music that is more important. Any number
of musicians from the world of pop testify to the links between
what they are doing and sexuality. It's not their words that are
primarily producing these feelings and moods. It is their music. Hip-hop's migration away from
its original cultural setting is a testimony to its universal
appeal to sinful human nature. White people in the suburbs may
have little connection with the ghetto. They may have no intention
of shooting anyone, being a drug dealer, or a hustler, or terrorizing
a harem of women. But the urge to dance in the
suggestive way of hip-hop runs across the cultures. Its message
travels however relevant or not the lyrics are to the experiences
of the consumers. The potency of the aggressive
musical form, coupled to the undue prominence that the MC
necessarily draws to himself, meant that hip-hop was always
going to foster the undue sexualization and hyper-male aggression that
it seemingly has in the world. It was endemic in the music.
However sanitized the version that Christian hip-hop represents,
this is the product that we have bought into. The music is the
music of aggression and sexual expression, and any other use
that it is put to is to swim against the tide. Well, my next
heading is this. The attitudes it produces. The
attitudes it produces. The logic of the slippery slope
is set before us in scripture. This I say, therefore, and testify
in the Lord, that he henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk
in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened,
being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance
that is in them because of the blindness of their heart, who
being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness
to work all uncleanness with greediness. Ephesians 4, verses
17 to 19. There is a greediness that this
sort of material spawns. A little leads to a little more. Before one knows it, one is given
over to it. Dan Lucarini comments about what
he observed when in the world of contemporary Christian worship.
It is not a happy tale. This is one of the reasons he
gives for leaving that world, and I quote him. To preserve
my marriage and to be faithful to God in all things, I needed
to separate from the temptations that were ever present in the
CCM setting. The ego gratification, an attraction
to the female members of the worship team." I end his quote
there. The same dangers are there for
the hip hop artists and their followers. It is not promising
terrain for the cultivation of holiness and the fear of the
Lord. One of the particular troubles
Dan Lucarini experienced was the downgrade in the standard
of the clothes people wore. Standards of decency and modesty
were sacrificed as the music placed its expectation on people
to dress as they would going to hear a secular band or attend
some function in the world. It has been generally observed
in the churches that there has been an increasing trend towards
wearing clothing that is inappropriate for worship service, and probably
anywhere else come to that. The music is part of the process,
generating its own expectations and suggesting conformity to
what the world would wear if hearing that kind of music. We
can couple this likewise to the growing acceptability of inappropriate
language and speech in the pulpit, and one would presume in the
pew as well. Mark Driscoll has loud music in the church. The
level of profanity in his speech and the crude remarks that he
makes show that he's adapting to the kind of setting that the
kind of music would suggest. For all the talk of being culturally
relevant, he has conformed himself to the world at large and offers
his mostly young male congregation a mildly sanitized version of
what they could have on the streets. Of course, though the assurance
may be given that the volume setting will remain low, there
is no guarantee that the promise will be honoured in the future.
A gradual year-on-increase may leave the congregation after
five years with ear-deafening decibels of sound to cope with.
Again, the nature of the music requires a conformity to its
natural milieu in order to work. terrorized by the accusation
that they are old-fashioned or that they will drive the young
people away, those of more mature judgment may be reduced to silence.
The music generates its own expectations as to how people should behave,
and those expectations are not set by the church, but by the
world. So there is a subtle override
which takes place here, which undermines the efforts to evangelize
and to edify the saints. The doctrine may be sound enough,
and the intention to preach to the lost sincere enough. But
what is being communicated to the people is the acceptability
of the culture from which the music comes, and the acceptability
of the kind of dance, dress, speech, and behavior that its
natural setting suggests. The worst excesses may be avoided,
but the direction of travel is towards the world. That is the
gravitational pull which has to be worked against. Why take
the risk? So my next heading is now this.
Some guiding principles in thinking about music. Undoubtedly, music
has great power to sway us emotionally in a way that perhaps nothing
else can. Therein lies its danger and the
need for careful thought. that we are instructed to sing
the praises of God is not in doubt. Rejoice in the Lord, O
ye righteous, for praise is comely for the upright. Praise the Lord
with harp. Sing unto him with a psaltery
and an instrument of ten strings. Sing unto him a new song. Play
skillfully with a loud noise. Psalm 33, verses one to three.
Or Psalm 71, verses 22 and 23. I will also praise thee with
a psaltery, even thy truth, O my God. Unto thee will I sing with
a harp, O thou holy one of Israel. My lips shall greatly rejoice
when I sing unto thee, and my soul which thou hast redeemed.
And then in the New Testament, Ephesians 5 verses 19 and 20. Speaking to yourselves in psalms
and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in
your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things
unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Colossians 3 verse 16, let the
word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing
one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing
with grace in your hearts to the Lord. So there are references
from the Old and the New Testaments. Music is to be part of our life
as worshipping people. The music is not incidental.
Whether we are musical or not, whether we can sing tunefully
or not, we are to sing to the Lord. But the music is to be
a suitable vehicle to express sanctified emotions. It is not
to disable the mind or wrestle it to the floor and disable it. It is, therefore, part of us,
worshipping in spirit and in truth, our loving the Lord with
heart and soul and strength and mind. Indeed, what we sing should
educate and sanctify our emotional life, so we can agree that we
are ideally to feel the power of the themes we sing. But what
kind of music lends itself to that process? What sort of music
rules itself out? How should one choose the style?
What renders anything unacceptable? Now, we may not need to be great
experts in music, but we do need to be aware of the function and
role of musical genres and styles. We need to have a modicum at
least of contact with developments out in the world, and to be alert
to the impact the world is having on the Church. We are not to
be unaware that there is an enemy who is seeking access to the
Church and who is looking to destroy the testimony and effectiveness
of the Lord's people. We cannot afford to be ignorant
of his devices. Firstly, we need to ask some
searching questions about the style of music itself. We need
to consider, as we have been doing with hip-hop, what the
music is intended to do. What is meant to be the effect
of the music on us? What emotions is it designed
to stir in us? We may need at this point to
study the stated intention of the composer. We need to see
where the composer has designed the music optimally to be played.
In this regard, we may need to see where the composer plays
it himself or herself. How do they play it? What is
the atmosphere that sustains it, or which it is meant to create?
What is the mood? How do they wish, ideally, to
see their music played? If the Christian performer or
composer is employing a genre of music that is new, we are
entitled to study its setting. We who are elders, deacons, church
officers, with responsibilities for the spiritual welfare of
our churches, need to ask the questions and consider the style
and background of the music. Because remember, the music is
not neutral. It is geared to producing feelings
of one kind or another. Hip-hop was meant to be fun.
It was meant to make people party. We have to ask what the nature
of fun and the party mood being catered for actually is. The
words may enhance that mood. They may be quite irrelevant
to it. But the primacy of the music ensures that it will be
heard above the words. So if the words have nothing
to say, the music will, for good or ill. We need to be alert to
this. Secondly, we need to be clear
about what kind of emotional states are appropriate in the
church and which are not. Not every emotion that man can
experience must necessarily be encouraged in the place of worship.
This is where there has been some confusion over the years.
The expectation is that everyone should be free to express their
emotions without any inhibition. While some feelings like anger
or anxiety might be ruled out, most of the rest are ruled in.
The worship is judged satisfactory to the extent that it has allowed
for the expression of these feelings in a satisfying way. This is
where we have to make distinctions and set boundaries. The individualistic
and subjective culture of our time has been allowed to dictate
to the church what it expects and wants. Prevailing musical
culture has exactly met that desire, with a pop concert as
one of its artefacts. The individual can go and enjoy
the music in a world of his own and be carried beyond the normal
range of emotional experience. Sadly, people now look for that
in the church, and the temptation is to alter the musical ethos
of the church to meet that expectation. The standard package of worship
in various ways attempts to cater for these tastes that have been
shaped by the world. We need to be alert to what kinds
of expressions of emotional life are valid in the church and which
are not. Here, the pressure is on to wear
down the resistance of those who are more conservative by
claiming their reluctance to yield this point is due to temperament,
Britishness, upbringing, ignorance, prejudice, repression, or something
of the like. We need to contend that not every
experience is right in the church. Some emotional states are not
right anywhere, let alone in the house of God. Take, for example,
the up-tempo music that begins so many services. This is the
praise element of the praise and worship phenomenon. It stirs
people up into a state of excitement and expectation. People are apt
to dance around or jump around during it. So the music is there
to facilitate this kind of experience. I know about it, I was there
for many years. But is this what we should expect?
Are we meant to be making room for this kind of expression of
emotion? Well, certainly, there should be zeal and enthusiasm
for the Lord's house, the Lord's day and the Lord's people. These
are virtues. But wild excitement and jumping
around does not belong there. This kind of expression of volatile
joy and febrile excitement risks unseating our reason and disabling
our thinking to a degree that transgresses scripture. Yet much
modern music is intended to produce exactly that kind of explosive
atmosphere. I have not frequented pop concerts,
but the excitement that these generate is replicated in some
Christian meetings. Pulsating and loud rhythms, supported
by lights and other atmospheric effects, get people moving at
the beginning of a meeting. You can see this, for example,
at New Frontiers New Day meetings for young people. The style is
indistinguishable from a pop concert. With hands held aloft,
the young folk are carried away by the music, much as they would
be in a secular concert. Comparing pictures and footage
of New Day with images from a secular pop concert, there is little
to tell them apart. Or take the music, employed by
Christian groups like Fatfish, fronted by the undoubtedly talented
Lou Fallingham. They too produce the same enthusiasm
and crowd-induced ecstasy in exactly the same way as the world
does. Again, we do well to stop and consider what emotions a
piece of music is designed to produce and whether these are
appropriate in a worship service. Because a human being is capable
of such experiences does not mean that they must be produced
and encouraged in the worship of God. Much of the modern music
in the church is designed to replicate this kind of non-Christian
atmosphere and unbecoming behavior in the church. Do we realize
this? When we incorporate this material
into our service, do we understand that this is what the composers
intended to reproduce? So we would contend that it's
much better to have music of a more stately, reverent and
elevated stamp. It's much better to have a more
solemn joy that better fits together with a holy and all-glorious
God whom we approach to worship. This more classical feel can
have livelier tunes and bright tunes, but the joy it is looking
to facilitate does not spill over into something that is not
sanctified. We also need to be alert to the
quite unique worship experience that passes in the contemporary
church for coming into the presence of the Lord or encountering God. The slower tempi and the use
of reflective mood music have their own peculiar aim, to bring
us into a semi-hypnotic state where we might close our eyes.
Then with the palms of our hands upraised, we have an encounter
with the Lord. These are like the slower numbers
which might figure at the end of a disco, when couples smooch
together. It does not belong in the worship
of God. it is not an appropriate use
of the term love when used of a holy and glorious God. In passing,
we can observe, along with this kind of music, the proliferation
of the term intimacy regarding the believer's relationship with
the Lord. It is in vogue among some branches
of the New Apostolic Reformation, the latest dominionist movement,
to speak of the church as the bride of Christ in ways that
go far beyond scripture. Women prepare themselves to meet
with the Lord. Some even put on their wedding
dresses to meet their heavenly bridegroom. It's not surprising
that John Wimber features in this particular story. His early
days were spent in the world of pop. He has been widely credited
with pairing together the two singers, who later became the
Righteous Brothers, with hits like You've Lost That Loving
Feeling and Unchained Melody. With contacts and that kind of
emotional music, we should not wonder that he reproduced similar
sounds in the church. These sounds have since travelled
forward among the ranks of Joel's army and the Manifest Sons. But
it is the world's idiom for achieving some physical closeness where
lovers can embrace. Learnt in the world of pop concerts,
Its transfer across the spiritual realities and spiritual experience
lands us back in the world of mystical experiences and is an
intrusion that will only mislead and produce excesses. So we need
to see what function the music plays in the world that it is
taken from. What kinds of thoughts and feelings
is it meant to engender? Are these appropriate in the
house of God? We are indeed to be reflective
and to ponder great truths as we worship, but not in a semi-hypnotic
state. So we need to be clear about
what kinds of emotional states we regard as appropriate in the
house of God. For this will then affect our
choice of music and the end that we put the music to. A third
consideration is to see how much the singing is dependent upon
a performance by the musicians. Could it be sung alone at home? Could it be sung unaccompanied
if necessary? If the sense of occasion and
worship relies upon musicians to produce it, we're using questionable
music. Worship is not about performance. We should be able to draw near
to the Lord whether we are in a group of three or 300. The
song should be able to be sung without high degrees of musical
proficiency and without sophisticated musicianship relying on technique. So often churches are people
by those who attend gatherings, where there is plenty of music
performed by a skilled band or orchestra, which leans heavily
on complex technology to produce the right sound. Much modern
song writing assumes that there will be a band performing the
piece and relies on sophisticated instrumentation to carry the
singing along. The singers may often have to
pause as some clever playing on the keyboard eventually provides
them with the next entree. Too much emphasis is placed on
performance, not enough on the singing and therefore the worshipper.
Fourthly, we have to ask whether there are any associations which
a piece of music has which render it unsuitable. An anecdote is
told of an occasion when Newton's hymn, Glorious Things of Thee
I've Spoken, was sung in a meeting set to the tune it shares with
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles. This caused offence to
someone who had served in the armed forces against the Nazis.
The connotations were too much for this man, and one would need
to be sensitive to this. For many of us, the better output
of the charismatic movement is still unpalatable because we
know about the lives and the practices of those who are the
composers. We know about the churches where
they belong and the kinds of things which are taught. We fear
their music in its home context functions as a sleeping draught
to people, persuading them that they have good spiritual standing
when the doctrines and practices of those churches would suggest
otherwise. The friendly sounds and the moving
tunes, the good jocturne and the powerful poetry, but all
of it linked to the deceiving of precious souls. The associations
are too great and too overwhelming. Even where the words and the
music might be suitable, the distraction of who the songwriter
is and what kind of church they belong to makes it impossible
to use their material in worship. It is a sore offering. It is
a defiled thing. Now we may overlook the doctrinal
blemishes of some of the great hymn writers of the past and
make allowance for their ecclesiology. But we know they cherish the
standards of holiness and good order that reformed churches
strive for. They concede to the holiness
of God in a way that we do, by which modern writers and the
churches and movements they belong to do not. A final and obvious
consideration in the selection of music to be sung in church
is, of course, the words. Banal and shallow contributions
do not belong in the worship of God. Words that are slang
are also to be ruled out, especially when these expressions are lifted
out of a worldly context. So we do have to consider the
words that we sing. While there is plenty of scope
for the imaginative use of language, there is a restraint that is
to be observed and a dignity that must be promoted. Conclusion. We have to report, as we complete
this analysis of hip-hop and the wider analysis of music in
the Church, that all is not well. The prevailing mood appears to
be that anything we offer to the Lord will be pleasing to
Him. Any music transferred from any setting or environment is
deemed satisfactory. But is it? God is a holy God,
and it is the sense of His glory that is most palpably absent
in the Church of today. A lot of talk about His glory,
but it is not matched by the commensurate behavior and attitude.
A lot of talk about worship, but zeal harnessed to this kind
of music risks being viewed as strange fire in the courts of
heaven. It did not benefit Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron,
who offered an unauthorized offering in Leviticus chapter 10 and perished
for their pains. The Lord may be extending a period
of grace to us to consider our ways. But the dull discernment
and sense of the majesty of God that is endemic in the church
indicates that misdemeanors may be exacting a heavy toll upon
us. We are not learning. We are not listening. It is to
be feared that we are forfeiting the Lord's true presence and
help in the process. It is slighting to his glorious
being when we reckon that music, where the purpose and style of
it is to engender opposition to his laws, is thought, in a
sanitized version, to bring him pleasure. That is presumption. So we must encourage those who
have a gift for writing good poetry. Likewise, we must encourage
those who have the ability to set words to good tunes. Our
musicians need our encouragement too and the help of the Lord.
They have such a responsibility as they seek to assist us in
our worship. For we are not looking for the
Lord's frown upon us, but his smile. Surely he will take the
more delight in our praises and worship, if we bring him an offering
unpolluted by the world, but having a fragrance of something
sacred. He is worthy of such choice offerings. The doctrines
we hold dear reserve him the place of total authority and
supremacy. Our worship should match those
convictions. May the Lord encourage us to
hallow his name in those offerings we bring to him.
Weighing Rap & Hip-Hop (2)
Series Contemporary Concerns
| Sermon ID | 3181443542 |
| Duration | 36:49 |
| Date | |
| Category | Special Meeting |
| Language | English |
Documents
Add a Comment
Comments
© Copyright
2026 SermonAudio.