Thursday, December 12, 2013

Christian Rap and it's suppose sinfulness

I have been following a blog for quite some time now. Hopefully my responses are educated. But I think the debate is finally over (I think). The Link to the last question begins here:

http://religiousaffections.org/articles/articles-on-culture/discussion-about-christian-rap-with-shai-linne-example-of-sinful-music/

It is interesting to note that Scott gives some form of example of music that 'sounds' horrible. He post videos of Christian hardcore music and which he says that some of these songs have lyrics but he cannot understand them. My question is why does he not look up the lyrics if he wants to understand them and perhaps maybe he could learn how to sing the song (most who like that genre do). It is not different than to suggest I am listening to a scream-o in which the screamer is hard to understand (once I begin to understand the lyrics the song becomes a little more reasonable).

It is the usual case in which Scott does not truly understand Scripture. He says let your manner of life be worthy of the Gospel (quoting Phil 1:27). I wonder what he would say about acts in which he disagrees with? According to this verse Scripture alone (Gospel) is the basis for our holy living. And the rule and conduct for our lives should be based upon what God has said in Scripture alone. This is not what he wants to say - Scripture does not speak on all areas of life. He just shot himself in the foot.

He assumes (wronglfully) that this music he speaks of is ugly. He simply does not understand the music.

Shai Linne I think has done a wonderful job in pressing the issue. He says, According to the rest of verse 27, a manner of life worthy of the gospel is seen as believers are “standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel”

Wonderful, and how is it that we stand in unity? Ephesians 4. Content, Content, Content.

Finally Scott addresses with his final reply. He speaks of his daughter who was assumingly acting bad. Perhaps maybe she was, maybe she was not. Lets give this to Scott. She is his daughter of course. But, again there are perhaps many things in which would be pride according to Scott that Scripture condones. For instance as calling out false doctrine. Not allowing those who hold to false doctrine to stand in or infiltrate the assembly. Yet in our day the Christian wants to unify with those who have false doctrine. This is Van Tillian presupposition. Well we cannot know whether this is so or not. I know I know you speak the truth, but your actions do not show it. Therefore, you are acting in pride. He assumes things.
Now there are some who want to say that one is speaking in pride when he or she addresses false doctrine. They assume that the communication of it is done in pride and sinfulness. The question is where or show me how this is sinful or prideful. If you press them on this question they cannot answer it. I am expecting certain men to tell me where in my comments I have been in pride. I am afraid they will not be able to show me where this is the case. Scripture already says what pride is and Scott is using extra-biblical reasoning to say that pride is more than what Scripture says it is.
Regardless, the interesting feature is that he cannot cite chapter and verse on the issue with his daughter. We are not talking about whether a man who actually does a sin knows it or not. That is possible. It is part of the fall that men do not know or see their sin as they ought. Perhaps some of the things that could be said is this that the intentions of people matter. This is true. We read books and the first thing we should ask is what does the author intend to say. Essentially this issue goes back to the first post on this issue. Although intentions are very important. Sometimes how we say things do matter in one sense. But again this is not to say that we should always say things in a nice way. Sometimes there are instances in which it is better to yell or to say something in a particular way than another time - this is Ecclesiastes.
Scott does continue on with the 'discussion' and most of what he says spurs on a question of whether he truly understands Shai's point.
Here is the link to the last discussion I think:
 http://religiousaffections.org/articles/articles-on-culture/discussion-about-christian-rap-with-shai-linne-example-of-sinful-music-rebuttal/

No comments: