Music Choices – Objective Subjectivity

Making musical choices — how do you decide what’s right and what’s wrong? The subject is full of controversy. Everyone, it seems, has an opinion, and yours is wrong because you disagree with me. (At least, that’s what I’m told.) There is a lot of confusion on the issue, to be sure. I wrote something on this topic earlier this year, outlining a pastoral philosophy for the non-musical pastor to lead his church in musical choices. However, recent on-line discussions challenged me to identify biblical reasons why some musical styles are unacceptable for Christian use.

Today’s article will address the subject. I hope that it won’t turn into a book!

I have no problem conceding at the outset that the Bible doesn’t explicitly address whether any particular style of music is good or bad. This is true of every art form. We can’t tell from explicit Bible passages whether any piece of art is good or bad. We often make decisions about art on the basis of “what we like” and “what we don’t like.” That is, our choices are very subjective, or at least seem so to a casual observer. One pastor in our discussions explained that he sets the tone for musical choices in his church because he is the pastor, and his tastes will rule the day. The approach has the advantage of being effective, but it doesn’t answer the question, “Can we offer anything more than subjective personal opinion as the criteria for making musical choices?”

Furthermore, regardless of our standard for evaluation (“what I like” or “what my music professor said” or “what I know about music technically” or what-have-you), our choices are quite likely to be inconsistent with our own standards. We might reject one piece that is quite similar in style to another piece we accept.

These thoughts account for the “Subjectivity” part of my title.

What is “Objective Subjectivity”? By that title, I want to acknowledge our musical choices can’t escape some subjective evaluations. We may have reasons for the choices we make, but we can’t explain them all, and they aren’t obvious to outside observers 100% of the time. At the same time, I think the Bible does give objective spiritual standards by which we can make choices about music in various contexts.

That accounts for the “Objective” part or the title.

When the Pharisees challenged Jesus about the disciples’ hand-washing habits, Jesus expanded his training of the twelve with these words:

And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. (Mt 15:16-20)

The first objective standard of the Bible regarding the arts is that, like all products of the minds of men, the arts more or less contain the corruption of the human heart. That isn’t to say that every piece of art is as defiled as it could be, but that as the heart is corrupted, so too are its expressions, whether it be foul words or foul art. Man communicates what is in his heart. Since the heart is depraved, man will produce depraved art. Some men are so wedded to depravity that almost nothing they produce is clean. Their worldview is that corrupt.

Another passage that touches on this is the works-of-the-flesh/fruit-of-the-Spirit contrast in Galatians 5.

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal 5:19-21)

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. (Gal 5:22-24)

The product of the flesh has certain characteristics; the fruit of the Spirit has the opposite characteristics. We see the works of the flesh as actions primarily and the fruit of the Spirit as attitudes, although hatred and wrath certainly are attitudes. Can we apply this to human communication? James does:

But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. (Jas 3:8-10)

Can we apply this distinction to art? (Is art communication? To quote Dr. Panosian, “I speak as a fool.”) The Bible doesn’t make this application that I can think of, but surely it is legitimate. Art means something. It says something. For an extended illustration how art communicates a worldview, last year I contrasted two paintings about war in a lesson done for our church. The audio is here, the notes here and the PowerPoint here. The paintings both communicate the horror of war, but one turns it into simply chaos, emphasizing its ugliness and dehumanization of men. That is truth, but there isn’t much beauty in its worldview (if any). The other painting, while presenting the horror of war also captures nobler themes of men and women coming to the aid of their fellows in the midst of the chaos and brutality of war. It is a far more satisfying and beautiful painting, in my opinion.

Both paintings reflect a worldview. One is almost nihilistic, the other, if not Christian, at least sees something of the image of God in man.

Let’s turn the same kind of thinking towards music. It is probably fairly obvious when a painting is full of “adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,” but it is less obvious in music. Yet I’ve seen music described with terms like these. As an illustration, I consulted a “theological journal,” (Rolling Stone Magazine) to see if I could find some examples. Here they are [please note, if you click the Rolling Stone links, you will find foul language in the articles]:

If Jagger’s melodramatic delivery during “Out of Control” suggested an epileptic seizure, his swampy harp playing heated the songs’ closing jam to a raging boil, and during “Saint of Me,” Woods’ pretty slide guitar leads and Richards’ raunchy chords played off each other like sweet and sour sauce. “Thief in the Night” provided the evening’s most sensual music, as Richards’ ragged croon floated over Watts’ rustling, swinging backbeat, supported by lush backing vocals and a dreamy horn section.¹

But even before there was Elvis, my world had begun to be shaped by the little radio with the six–inch mono speaker that sat on top of our refrigerator. My mother loved music, and she rahised us on pop music radio. So between 8:00 and 8:30 every morning, as I snowed sugar onto my Sugar Pops, the sounds of early pop and doo wop whispered into my young and impressionable ears. Doo wop, the most sensual music ever made, the sound of raw sex, of silk stockings rustling on backseat upholstery, the sound of the snaps of bras popping across the USA, of wonderful lies being whispered into Tabu–perfumed ears, the sound of smeared lipstick, untucked shirts, running mascara, tears on your pillow, secrets whispered in the still of the night, the high school bleachers, and the dark at the YMCA canteen. ((Bruce Springsteen delivering a keynote address at SXSW in 2012: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/exclusive-the-complete-text-of-bruce-springsteens-sxsw-keynote-address-86379/))

How old were you when you became obsessed with Nirvana?
They had their big breakthrough when I was young, like five or six, but it was something my mother listened to and turned me on to. And once I became a teenager and a weird kid, labeled a “faggot” or whatever, that’s when it really all connected with me. It was perfect angry music that at one time really took over the world –it was an inspirational soundtrack for my teenage years. ((Musician John McCauley being interviewed about “fronting” the band Nirvana in 2014, https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/inside-nirvanas-secret-post-rock-hall-show-236833/))

[Note: All emphasis (underlines) is mine.]

As mentioned, all of the above came from Rolling Stone magazine. It took about twenty minutes to find these quotes. Some claim music is amoral, but people in the secular music field easily use terms like “sensual,” “raging boil,” “raunchy,” “no shame,” “raw sex,” “angry,” and so on to describe their music. Remember the works of the flesh? Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like… If secular music people think their music communicates these themes, what is the source of this music?

Note especially the article describing Sly and the Family Stone that said, “The music, the words and the meaning are all one great experience.” Note the distinction between words and music, and the combination of the two in the whole meaning of the composition. While some want to limit the evaluation of music to, “Are the words good?” the secular world doesn’t think this way. And the secular world is able to see the sensuality of their sound when many Christians seem blind to it.

The secular world produces sounds (music) that it calls sensual, raunchy, and angry. We aren’t surprised, given their anti-God worldview. What are we to say about Christians who imitate the sound of the world and claim to be led by the Spirit? Make no mistake, the current Contemporary Christian Music scene is imitative, not innovative. The new styles in contemporary music don’t start in Christendom and work their way into the world; the new styles always (I think it is safe to say) start in the world and Christians imitate them. Do these Christians have “sensual, raunchy, angry” worldviews? Not necessarily, but they are imitating the sound of those who do. (It is possible that they have a materialistic worldview, and worship at the altar of Mammon, but that’s another argument — and article.)

The Bible has a lot to say about the human heart and its many depraved ways of expressing itself. We’ve contrasted the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit in this article. Christian music, until the last generation or so, tended to be markedly different from the music of the world. There was a sweeter, fresher, gentler, and far more majestic quality to it. Where did that come from? Perhaps the work of the Spirit in the redeemed heart?

Is it really so hard to make musical choices? While our choices are somewhat subjective, if we will consider the contrast between the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit, we will tend to end up in the same place. We may disagree on some specific musical offerings, but we will tend to choose on the objective basis of those types of music that ennoble a Christian man over and against those that degrade and defile a Christian man.

---

Don Johnson is the pastor of Grace Baptist Church of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.

---

Photo by Michael Maasen on Unsplash

1. A 1998 article describing a tour event of the Rolling Stones in Chicago — https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/stones-confidently-close-out-u-s-tour-in-chicago-122289/))

   Beyoncé’s new album will be “a lot more sensual” and “empowering” than her previous releases … Describing the new album as a combination of sounds from her last LP, 4, and 2008’s I Am . . . Sasha Fierce, Beyoncé talked candidly about how becoming a mother influenced her music: “Right now, after giving birth, I really understand the power of my body,” she said. “I just feel my body means something completely different. I feel a lot more confident about it. Even being heavier, thinner, whatever. I feel a lot more like a woman. More feminine, more sensual. And no shame.” ((Describing Beyoncé’s album 4 in 2013, https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/beyonce-new-album-is-more-sensual-and-empowering-127483/))

   Some rather sensual sounds which I could only write as “ugh ugh” are an integral part of the message. The music, the words and the meaning are all one great experience. ((A 1968 article describing the album Life by Sly and the Family Stone, https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-album-reviews/life-184036/ [↩]