Rock and Roll Sound of Music or Noise of War

As Joshua and Moses returned down the mountain after receiving the Law from God, they heard what at first they thought was the noise of war; but as they hurried closer, they recognized that the people were singing rather than fighting. Nonetheless, their song soon proved to be the sound of war as three thousand men of Israel lost their lives in punishment. The church of today faces a similar situation. With the prevalence of rock music in Christian services, those approaching the average church house will often find themselves wondering if the noise that they hear is that of war against God or music praising God. It is a question well worth pondering; for although we sing to a God who inhabits the praise of His people, we also sing to a God who executeth judgment upon all. Let us determine then in which category God Himself would place rock music. Would He consider it to be the sound of music or the noise of war?

Marbren, I just read the full article, “Rock and Roll: Sound of Music or Noise of War”. My initial response is that his thesis - namely that the very sound of a “back beat” (a regular syncopated rhythm) is Satanic in origin and therefore spiritually and physically destructive - is a little bit of truth taken way, way, way to the extreme.

First of all, the writer is not just saying music that we readily define as “rock and roll” is the only “rock and roll”. He defines the “rock sound” with any type and style of music that has a regular back beat (syncopated rhythm). This would include African American spirituals (”Go Tell It On the Mountain” for example), many, many American folk songs, Stephen Foster songs like, “O, Susanah”, “Camp Town Races”, all bluegrass music including “I Saw the Light”, “I’ll Fly Away”, etc. Songs by George Gershwin (”I’ve Got Rhythm”, “Rhadsody in Blue”, etc.), Irving Berlin songs (”Alexander’s Ragtime Band”), songs like “Singing in the Rain”, country western music (including “God Bless the U.S.A.”) and on and on. “Surfin’ U.S.A”, “The Little Old Lady from Pasadena”, “I Want to Hold Your Hand”, - these are Satanic songs?

Plus the writer made some statements about the Bible and music that are definitely a stretch of logic. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that certain sounds or rhythms are satanic. If it were all that important, wouldn’t you think that God would have told us??

The writer also mentions “whale songs”, “stellar sounds”, “bird sounds”. He says none of these things have a rock beat to them. The truth is they don’t have ANY disernable regularly recurring rhythm pattern to them - no strong beat rhythms nor syncopated rhythms. At best they are “poly-rhythmic”, that is, changing and fluid rhythm patterns that are not regular and recurring.

As to whether or not a “backbeat” rhythm ever occurs naturally in nature - I honestly don’t know if that’s true or not, but even if it is true, what does that prove? There are lots of things that do not occur naturally in nature but are not necessarily considered bad things - such as engines, automobiles, telephones, radios, pianos, roads, gardens, farms, etc.

He mentions the effects of “rock rhythms” on plants and a various types of people. There is no question that music affects us, as we discussed before, but in these studies he quotes it says nothing about VOLUME. I don’t care what kind of music it is - if it is played at a certain decible level - it is going to do damage to you and your body.

So, my overall impression is that the writer is genuinely concerned about the effects of “rock sound” on people. I do not question his motives, but I do question his logic and therefore his conclusions. He is wrong about the backbeat not existing prior to “rock and roll”. It may be argued that there were no classical songs or traditional hymns that were predominately syncopated like modern rock music, but there certainly are sections and passages in all styles of music - baroque, classical, hymns, Gospel songs, etc.

I would also dispute his thesis that rock is only the “back beat” or syncopated beat. Rock is also very strong on 4/4 or common time. It usually establishes that strong four beat tempo - then throws in syncopation for interest.

I think the writer, though sincere, is making some illogical conclusions. Remember, he is not just saying Rock Music alone is the problem - it is the very sound of a regular backbeat. And, as I previously mentioned - that would exclude almost all folk music and popular music of all styles and eras.

As to musical sounds and styles being neutral, I guess I would qualify that with volume.

He also quotes Little Richard and other rock musicians who claim they got their music from Satan. That may very well be - but Little Richard is a theological and musical expert?? He may know about his experience with rock music and his motivation for making music, but I don’t see how he can claim that even Christian rock is Satanic. It seems a cop-out to me to blame the sound of rock music (as opposed to the lyrics) for the rotten lifestyles that many rock stars have. How about Hollywood stars? What’s their excuse? How about politicians? Isn’t the common denomiator fame? Wealth? Power?? Greed?? It’s the music that’s making them act this way? It’s not my sinful nature and personal choices that caused me to experience these bad things - it’s the music! I don’t buy it.

Whew, I’m off my soap box now. Anyway, that’s my 2 cents.

Quix: However, when the volume is destroying children’s (as well as adult’s) hearing . . . SOMETHING IS HORRIBLY WRONG whether the people who’s hearing is being destroyed LIKE it, are addicted to the dopamine high from it, or not.

Nevadan: Completely agree.

Also, I checked up on one of the studies mentioned in the article. They tested the effect classical music and “voodoo music” (that is, actual music of voodoo practitioners) on two separate sets of mice. It says they used low volume in order to eliminate that as a problem.

According to their research, the voodoo music did have negative effects on the mice (it took the “voodoo” mice three times as long to complete a maze test as did the “classical” mice). Also, there was measurable, physical neron damage to the “voodoo” mice.

So, what I would like to know (and this was not discussed in the study results) exactly what volume was used and for how long were these mice exposed? What was the tempo (speed) of the music? I think there are still many variables here. If voodoo music is primarily just rhythm - I don’t see how that is the same thing as music with a back beat. Most popular music with syncopation (songs anyway) have a melody, key changes, some kind of variation within them. Anyway, I don’t see this study as conclusive that all music with a back beat is harmful.

Thanks Nevadan, You have made this thread one of the most educational ones I have ever seen on FR. These past few days have been truly fascinating for me. It started Sunday morning. I format our Sunday worship for my Pastor and our group every week. We meet at a local college for worship and Bible Study. We are in exile, unconstitutionally, for the last 2 years, from a mainline denomination, Praise God! This is due to the fact that the true gospel message, presented by our Pastor, made too many pew sitters and the denominational leaders “uncomfortable”. I burn CD’s for our music every week using rhapsody, emusic and itunes. Last Sunday, for the first time, our Pastor selected a Christian rock song as our opening music. I thought nothing of it, though I wondered how my mom would like it. In the old days she would have been critical, as you would expect from an old time church lady. Now, her spiritual growth has been so beautiful, that it didn’t get one judgmental legalistic response from her at all. However, when I played it Sunday it felt a bit “strange” to me. I moved on without considering the issue again until I got some moving correspondence. It was not about rock music, per se, but more about dangerous volume levels in worship style. Then I did some research and started this thread. My mom, sister and I have had some wonderful discussions about this topic. Is God saying something? One night, this week, I watched an episode of “Bones” with my wife. It dealt with the culture of satanic rock. It was horrific. You have done a wonderful job dispelling the back beat issue. I, as an engineer, was looking for a one simple answer. Now I feel it must be a combination of variables. Volume is probably a key. I enjoy rock music, but something feels a bit strange. It is not a big issue or a crusade for me. If Satan wanted to influence music how might he do it? I am not totally convinced that all music is neutral, just sounds. You are probably 99% right.

Marbren,

First of all I want to say it’s been a pleasure discussing all of this with you and Quix. Sometimes these discussions can get contentious, but I didn’t sense that from anyone.

I whole-heartedly agree that most secular rock music has degenerated over the last 50 years. Depending on the band, the messages in some of the songs are outright evil and wicked. Then you have hip hop and rap that is so linguistically vile and violent. I don’t listen to secular radio any more unless its the oldies stations and talk radio. I quit listening to pop radio back in the mid-seventies. So much of it now, even the non-sexual, benign stuff is boring with nothing really new or creative. Melody and harmony are not much of the songs anymore - just distortion and screaming.

I got interested in music as a kid when I heard Elvis, but more so when I first heard the Beatles. I LOVED their music. It motivated me to learn to play guitar, then piano. As I got older I began to see their empty lives and the stupid things they got into. I still am grateful to them for a wonderful era of new pop music that is part of my childhood/teen memories.

So, I guess what I’m saying, for me rock music got me interested in music. I eventually majored in music and began to serve God as a music director. Of course, rock music back then is much different now. My children have all gotten into music because of pop music - but we have monitored as best we could what they listened to. Every so often we have to put the cabash on certain groups.

This is one of the reasons I’m not as down on rock and roll as maybe others are. I have seen positive elements of it. But, you have to be discerning - like you’ve said - some of it is downright wicked. I just don’t think that it has to be that way.

That’s why the guy who wrote that article kind of bugs me because he tries to demean a whole genre of music and squelch all argument by calling it Satanic and anyone who uses the style as Satanic. How do you discuss this with someone who has already decided that you are a “tool of Satan” unless you agree with him?

One thing about contemporary Christian worship today is that so many evangelical churches have done away with all traditional hymns and gospel songs. I went to a music seminar for my church a couple of months ago and they had a morning worship time as part of the day. Out of the ten songs that we sang, I only knew one of them because the others were all new (at least to me) contemporary songs.

I think so many Christians today know nothing about the rich, wonderful hymns of faith from our past. There is so much great doctrinal content in hymns - many written during times of great duress, such as “A Mighty Fortress is Our God”.

The hymn “It Is Well With My Soul” was written by a Horatio Spafford. He was a very successful businessman back in the late 1800’s. He was diagnosed with some kind of ailment and his doctor told him he needed to get away from work for awhile. He decided to take his wife and family on a cruise to Europe.

At the last minute something came up at his work and he couldn’t go with them when the ship departed. They decided to have the wife and three daughters go ahead of him and he would meet them in London a week later.

While his family’s ship was crossing the Atlantic, it collided accidentally with another in the middle of the Atlantic. Their ship sank within a few minutes. Of Mr. Spafford’s family, only his wife survived - all three of their daughters drowned. Mr. Spafford immediately left on another ship so he could meet up with his wife. The ship’s captain notified Mr. Spafford when their ship crossed the place where his family’s ship went down. When he went back to his cabin, he began to put down on paper the thoughts and feelings he was experiencing - he wrote,

“When peace like a river, attendeth my way, when sorrows like sea billows roll - whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say, “It is well, it is well with my soul.”

What beautiful words of faith. There are many, many Christians today that not only don’t know that song, they barely know “Amazing Grace”. That’s just wrong. The answer is to blend traditional songs and appropriate contemporary songs. It can be a very worshipful experience if planned out correctly.

Okay, I’ll stop now - I keep going on and on.

marbren: As a joke, I started shaking with the music pretending I was about to drive off the road, We all had a good laugh, but, where did the idea come from to shake and pretend I was about to crash the car? Is sound really neutral?

Nevadan: Well, it depends on what you mean by neutral. As mentioned before, music can and does affect us physically in a variety of ways. Certain tempos, keys (major/minor), dissonance, and volume can all affect one’s mood. This is why we sometimes “tap our foot” to the beat of a song. So, to the extent that music physically affects us - no it is not neutral.

What I’m saying is that musical sounds are “morally” neutral. A particular musical note is not “moral/sacred” and another “immoral/sinful”. It is my contention that it is the words that push the song into the moral/immoral category. The words add a whole new dimension to the sounds of the music. The words conjure up images in our minds that affect us to a much greater degree that simply listening to the sound of the music. The words can greatly enhance or diffuse the power of the music.

For example, think about only the music (the melody, the beat) to “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” - without the words or if you didn’t know the words, the song would not have nearly as much impact on us emotionally.

After listening to the Linkin Park song, I noticed it had a pretty fast tempo, big dynamic changes from soft to loud, heavy beat on the loud sections. In addition, the words “Headstrong” were pretty confrontational. I couldn’t clearly understand all the lyrics, but it was kind of an “in your face” message. So, the music wedded with these lyrics give a hostile, aggressive feeling to the song. The music alone makes you want to move to the changes - but, with the words, you also get “message”.

I think the song would have a competely different feel to it if the words were talking about the trial and crucifixion of Jesus (just for an example).

So, to reiterate, music is not physically neutral with or without the words. You can use music to hurt people physically by playing it extremely loud (doesn’t the military have a technique of using loud music directed by special speakers?). Any music can be manipulated to causing damage to us if we increase the volume to certain decibels.

But, once again, as to whether a four-beat, or three beat, or syncopated beat or certain keys or melodies, or tempos is “moral - immoral”, I just don’t think that morality applies. Notes are notes, beats are beats.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.