Thank you for taking the time to respond to my question, “Is Holy Hip Hop holy?” I hope I hear the sound of iron sharpening iron. I hope I also hear the sound of hearts softening as we graciously hear the concerns and responses of fellow believers.
1. Hip Hop or Rap First, some clearer definitions of terms is necessary. The culture is Hip Hop but the music is Rap. I’m told that most who advocate the Church’s use of Rap do not necessarily advocate the adoption of Hip Hop culture. 2. Four venues I’m also told that although I asked a question regarding the place of Rap in public worship, that I slipped into discussing its broader role as well. I think that’s probably right. So let’s clarify the four possible venues in which Christians are using Rap. i. Public worship: the regular Lord’s Day meetings for hearing the Word, worshiping, etc.ii. Evangelism: using Rap to reach out to Hip Hop culture
iii. Concerts: Gospel Rap performances in churches and other places where few of the audience are from Hip Hop culture
iv. Personal: private listening to music/watching of videos As my question made clear, my main concern was to establish whether Rap had a place in public worship. The feedback I’ve received in public and private is that the vast majority of Christians who want to use Rap in venues (ii) (iii) and (iv) do not advocate its use in “ordinary” public worship (i). I wanted to establish the public worship dimension first because, as the feedback confirms, it’s an easier question to unite on. It also makes us ask “Why not in public worship?” And if there are reasons for not using Rap in public worship, are any of these reasons applicable in evangelism, concerts, and personal use? 3. The Medium is (part of) the Message A number of respondents argued that the container (Rap genre) is neutral, it’s only the contents (the words) that we should consider. Leaving aside for the moment the question of whether the Rap genre is neutral, I’m quite surprised that anyone who has observed the impact of marketing and packaging on political and popular culture can deny what Marshall McLuhan concluded, “the medium is the message,” meaning that the form of the medium is so embedded in the message that the medium heavily influences how the message is perceived. Would President Obama go to peace talks with Iran’s President wearing combat fatigues and carrying a machine gun? Would he deliver the State of the Union address in Bermuda shorts and a beach boy T-shirt? Would you evangelize in Alabama wearing a Ku Klux Klan outfit? The medium may not be THE message, but it’s usually a large and inseparable part of it. That’s why when God came to earth to save sinners, His medium was a weak and vulnerable baby boy in an animal’s feeding trough. What a medium, what a message! That’s why the Lord ordained plain preaching as the primary way to evangelize the lost and build up His Church. It’s so stripped of every human addition and adornment, that the medium itself contains a powerful message. It says to all listeners, “We are relying only on the power of God and His Word.” To the extent that we add to preaching in our churches (or in our evangelism?), we are at risk of turning aside from the power of God. Our message may be “Salvation is of the Lord” but our medium may be (unintentionally) saying “and of man.” 4. Are all cultures morally neutral? No culture or musical genre is morally neutral. Thus, I have been a stern and steady critic of WASP culture for almost twenty years (ever since I was converted actually). I am grieved by our selfish individualism, our materialistic greed, our cruel abuses of power, our blatant and subtle racism, and so much more. I’ve been helped to see this more clearly by moving outside my cultural comfort zone over the years: a year among the gypsies of Eastern Europe, five years of outreach among the homeless and the male prostitutes of the inner city, three years of living as one of a very small white minority among thousands of Indians and Pakistanis in the “mini-India” part of Glasgow, etc. On a recent Connected Kingdom Podcast, Pastor Conrad Mbewe said that one of the advantages of African pastors studying in American seminaries was that when they return they act as mirrors to show their church their faults. (I see it the other way as well through our wonderful African students at PRTS). It’s frighteningly easy to simply assume that our own culture is normal, morally neutral, and everyone else’s is sinful. Our belief in total depravity should make us respect external critics far more than our own feelings of comfort and familiarity. So, just as I expect and demand that you expose me and my culture to the loving glare of biblical scrutiny, so I hope Hip Hopping Rappers will from time to time welcome the same challenge. 5. What’s wrong with Gospel Rap? Let’s assume for a moment that we can detach Rap music from Hip Hop culture. And let’s also assume a Rap song that’s full of Gospel words, full of biblical doctrine. Is that enough to make it OK? Well no, because, as we saw above, the medium also has to be considered. I’m sure few would argue that the way to reach American white supremacists is to dress up in white sheets, pointy hats, and carry flaming crosses while preaching the Gospel. Dietrich Bonhoeffer also resisted the idea of the German church taking on the symbols, emblems, and organization of the Nazi government in order to reach the Germans who were embracing National Socialism (an argument that was being made in the church at that time). So what’s wrong with the medium of Rap music. Why am I questioning its use by Christians? Is it just because I don’t like it? Well to be honest, the first time I heard it, it impacted me powerfully. One of my students played a few tracks to me in the course of a long car journey, and I was deeply moved. And challenged. Even confused. But the more I thought about it the more I remembered how I have also been powerfully moved (even to tears) by Meat Loaf, Queen (in a past life!), Hungarian gypsy funeral songs, the Star Spangled Banner, Bagpipes, etc. I then decided to listen to more and watch more of the videos associated with this music. What I found was that there was quite a range in the Christian Rap genre. For example you have Atonement Q&A by Shai Linne and Stephen the Levite. Its words are substantial and intelligible. It is more “conversational” and less confrontational. On the other hand there’s Lecrae and Tedashai’s “Go Hard” which I think is more typical of the genre. The words are less prominent (and intelligible) and the beat much more so. But it’s the presentation that disturbs me most. If there’s one word that comes to my mind it’s “aggression.” If you turned down the sound and compared it to a secular Rap video they both seem to communicate angry aggression, even in the use of Christ’s name. I know these men are not like that in real life; I’ve seen and heard moving, Christ-centered, and humble interviews with them. I know I misrepresent Christ at times by words and actions that contradict my profession of faith. My own sinful nature, my background and my prejudices warp and distort everything I want to do for Christ. I’m glad for everyone who has painfully pointed out these inconsistencies, and I battle against them daily. But may I be permitted to raise a question about the inconsistency of joining such seemingly angry and aggressive expressions and movements with the Gospel of Peace? I grieve over the weak and effeminate presentations of the Gospel that fill so many pulpits, but I still have to ask if this is not going to the other extreme. Does this accurately represent the meekness and lowliness of Christ? Do people take away from this music an accurate picture of the character and conduct of Christ? It might be argued, “But if we are to reach the violent gangs of our inner cities, we need to use the same aggressive posturing.” But remember Paul was living in the Roman Empire, one of the most militaristic and macho cultures ever, and he still relied on the “weakness” of preaching. He didn’t dress up as a gladiator
Maybe I’m over-sensitive. I’ve had a couple of horrible and painful encounters with violence in my life. Also, for a number of months, I was targetted by two (WASP!) gangs in Glasgow. My twin brother was not as fast a runner as I was and ended up beaten close to death beside a railway track one night. He still suffers the consequences of that. I’m feeling sick and breaking out in a cold sweat even as I recall these terrifying months. So, I’ll admit, I’m not probably the most objective viewer of Rap. Although maybe that qualifies me more?
6. Roots, fruits, and associations.
A number of respondents challenged the roots, associations, and present associations argument I made. Here’s an excellent article which explores that in more detail than I was able to. I hope by now that I have done enough to demonstrate that I agree with the large number of comments that urged me to think about the roots, fruits, and associations in my own cultural background. Let me be very clear: I believe that the worst elements of WASP culture have done more to destroy the Western Church than Hip Hop has or ever will. But I still don’t believe that the answer is to bring in another sin-warped culture. 7. Stepping-stone evangelism I spent some time last night discussing this question with my African American neighbors. (His father was a leading figure in Martin Luther King’s Civil Rights movement). If I’m honest, I’d hoped they would be among the large proportion of African American Christians who still oppose the use of Gospel Rap in the churches. But they weren’t. They told me that they also had been very reluctant to accept rap music in their churches, and still don’t like it. However, while agreeing with me that the associations are grim, they challenged me on a few of my arguments. They said they had seen Gospel Rap reach and change the lives of young African American men (don’t know about women). But they also said that eventually, under the Word, these young men moved away from Rap and its culture more and more. They viewed it more as a stepping-stone to reach the lost, but that maturity and biblical teaching would move them gradually away from it and to a more sober, orderly, and reverent form of worship. The stepping-stone argument is powerful. Our inner cities are certainly not going to be won by be-suited, white men swooping in for a few minutes a week with soup, sandwiches, and a sermon. But where do we draw the line with the stepping-stone? How do we reach Islamic suicide bombers? How do we reach strippers? How do we reach callous Wall Street traders? We all draw the line somewhere, but why? and where? Conclusion We will never all fully agree on what is allowable for Christians in the four venues (see above). However, we will surely all agree that Christians should be challenging and learning from one another about what is sinful or holy, and what is wise or unwise in these four venues. I am sure we do all agree on the desperate need of the inner cities (see this heart-rending article from yesterday’s New York Times), and on the long-term failure of the Church, especially the Reformed Church, to meet that need. Gospel Rappers are doing more than me in this regard at this time in my life, and in that I salute them. And though I wish them to re-consider some of the means they are using (or at least the venues and the extent to which they are using them), I also need much more of the spirit of Philippians 1:18 when trying to evaluate their approach.
Outstanding response! I especially appreciated: “But may I be permitted to raise a question about the inconsistency of joining such seemingly angry and aggressive expressions and movements with the Gospel of Peace?” When you asked where we are to draw the line I was reminded of some imagery that Cornelius Van Til once used. He spoke of two men walking down opposite sides of the street-one to a severe danger and the other to safety. He said it would do no good for the one who was walking towards safety to turn around and walk with the one headed towards danger in order to warn him of the danger he was in. After all, if he was willing to “walk in his shoes” for a bit, than the road that leads to danger can’t be all that dangerous. Van Til commented that what is needed is not a walking hand in hand, but stopping the person dead in their tracks and turning them around. He was, in effect, saying that the kingdom of God can only be built upon the ruins of the kingdom of darkness. Now I know that this doesn’t answer every contextualization question, and maybe even further complicates it. But when I read the NT I’m inclined to think that Jesus and the Apostles (and the Prophets) were radically counter culture in their message and their lives. Perhaps we’re too willing to make our cultures our standing ground…
Dr. Murray, Thank you for your labors on this topic. Might we all recognize the timbers in our own eye as we lovingly dislodge the splinter in another’s. Might God keep us genuinely humble!I pray that our GREAT Savior’s praise might truly redound to His glory.
A very godly response, though I still agree with your initial premise. Seems like you took a lot of heat, but it was an interesting discussion.I should mention that I am black and was heavily into the hip-hop culture before I was saved. The article you link to is excellent as well (http://www.religiousaffections.org/articles/articles-on-music/can-rap-be-chri…. I think your strongest argument here is that the “medium is the message”. The lyrics can be excellent, very creative, forceful and connecting, without doubt. As you make the distinction, there are different varieties and styles, but essentially the culture and the music is inseparable. You see that in the 2nd video you included above. We do some work with prisoners and interestingly, hip hop has never been a request. If there is one environment where you would think hip hop would carry weight, it is here. Instead, the simple word of God, presented clearly, is what God prescribes. Yes, no doubt, we could win the masses with hip hop services and basketball tournaments, but in the end what have we accomplished? The straightforward preaching of the gospel is what is needed. Anyone who argues that this is not sufficient is on shaky ground.But I like your conclusion. In the end, God can do what He likes with whatever He likes.
The problem I have with this response is that it is still in the realm of your opinion. How is this not a Romans 14 issue (which a commenter pointed out in the last post)?Under point 5, you point out the problem with rap is that it is a medium of aggression. Says who? You? Would Lecrae say that? Who should I follow here? Where in the Scriptures are we told to not be aggressive when it comes to rooting out sin in our lives (which is what that song is about)? Where in the Scripture are we told to not use aggressive means to “mortify” apathy, laziness, & nominalism (Rom 6.12)? Would you not counsel a pastor to “plead” with his people to turn from sin? Is there not some measure of right aggression in that? How do you square your argument with I Cor 9.19-23, where it seems the mandate is for believers to enter into other contexts to win people to Christ? The only argument you gave is the medium-message, but you established nothing by Scripture in that argument. You only pointed to McLuhan and then used far reaching exaggerations to show how the medium is part of the message. I don’t think any right-minded Christian would agree with dressing as the Klan to reach Alabamians. But you did nothing to establish the medium-is-part-message assertion from Scripture. You also did nothing to actually show how hip-hop as a medium is actually shaping the message. No verses, no text, no biblical teachings. You also pointed to the inconsistency of hip-hop and then asked “Do people take away from this music an accurate picture of the character and conduct of Christ?” My response is absolutely! Did not Jesus get angry over sin? Did he not get “frustrated” when his disciples failed to see who he was? Did he not “aggressively” go after the pharisees for their hypocrisy?Lastly, I think you’re being inconsistent (or at least really vague & unclear) on your point that God ordained “plain preaching as the primary way to evangelize the lost and build up His Church.” What constitutes “plain preaching”? Can a minister get angry over the sin in his own life & congregation? Can he be “aggressive” at times with those in unrepentant sin? Can he display his emotions while preaching? Where does the word “plain” as an adjective to preaching originate? What exactly do you mean by “plain”?Conclusion:I think your argument is lacking because it lacks any exposition of Scripture and it does not wrestle with “contextualization” passages (I Cor. 9, etc). Also, you made no attempt to establish (from Scripture) where & how we are supposed to draw the line for what constitutes a bad medium.
Nick, thanks for your response. First, is Rap aggressive? Have a look at the article I link to above on the origins of Rap. And I don’t think “aggressive” is just a matter of my opinion. Try showing some Rap videos or playing some Rap songs (even Christian ones) to a broad cross-section of people and ask them to sum up what they see in a word or two. I doubt Christian Rappers will deny that they are presenting the Truth in an “in your face” style. I thought that was one of the “selling points.” I think you probably do accept “aggressive” as an accurate description of Rap, as you go on to defend aggression in the Christian life. You say: “Where in the Scriptures are we told to not be aggressive when it comes to rooting out sin in our lives (which is what that song is about)? Where in the Scripture are we told to not use aggressive means to “mortify” apathy, laziness, & nominalism (Rom 6.12)? Would you not counsel a pastor to “plead” with his people to turn from sin? Is there not some measure of right aggression in that?”I wonder if you are perhaps confusing the physical with the spiritual here. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but spiritual. We don’t fight our sin with physical means (that’s what monks and ascetics believe), but with spiritual means. There is to be warfare against our sin, but it is largely internal and invisible. It is not accomplished with physical aggression. (And I’m sure you don’t really think we are to chase hypocrites out of the churches with whips.) I agree that the preacher must plead with sinners, but with tears and compassion, as Jesus did even when pronouncing the woes on the Pharisees (Matthew 23). Many emotions should be expressed in the pulpit but aggression has no place in our presentation of the Gospel (James 1:20; 3:17; 2 Tim. 2:24; Gal. 5:22). I believe these Scriptures may begin to answer your request for Biblical verses to help us decide where we cross the line in what medium to use. Have a look at 2 Corinthians 4:7-12 and 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 where Paul teaches that the medium of his own physical weakness helped set forth the power of God. In other words, the medium was a large part of the message. And if you wish an up-to-date analysis of the impact of medium upon message in a Christian context may I recommend Flickering Pixels by Shane Hipps (Zondervan).I’m sure this won’t answer all your questions, Nick. And you’re right, I do need to work more with 1 Corinthians 9. However, I hope I’ve helped clarify a couple of matters. You’ve certainly helped me clear up a few more things in my own mind and I thank you for that.
Dr. Murray, thanks for the response. I too have benefited from this “conversation.” Rarely do I comment on blogs, but thought I’d do so on this one. I did look up the verses you listed and tried to carefully read your response to try to understand it clearly. A few responses:1. Physical vs. Spiritual. I totally agree that fighting sin is spiritual, not physical. But this seems to be where you are being inconsistent in your argument (and response). No christian-rap artist is physically “chasing hypocrites out of the churches with whips”…nor are they advocating anyone else do so. So why do you use such an exaggerated example? No rap-artist would agree with that. It seems really unhelpful (and uncharitable) to say things that no one on either side would advocate. What these guys are doing is being aggressive with words (and medium) to spiritually fight sin (not physically). And this is where I see a disconnect. Why can’t we be aggressive with words when fighting sin? Rap is the medium for the words, and it seems to me the genre of rap is actually a better medium for this than most other things. 2. Re: aggression and the verses you provided: first, listing verses is helpful, but it seems to me you need to actually exposit those verses in order to provide a foundation for your argument. For example, James 1.20 says “the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.” But, there certainly is such a thing as righteous-anger (Jesus being our primary example). So YES, on the one hand we ought to be “slow to anger”….but then a time comes when anger is necessary. So we can’t just say “never get angry”; we need to exposit/explain when it is appropriate to get angry and the proper means of releasing that anger. Second, I think this same argument applies to the verses you cited about the medium of weakness. Is it possible to be weak & lowly while using the medium of hip-hop? I would argue the appeal of Christian rappers is exactly that: they are weak & lowly by putting Christ in the center stage, not themselves (Lecrae’s Background comes to mind). You cite these verses as showing the medium is part of the message (I agree). But was Paul intending those passages to be litmus tests for the mediums we use, or was we writing about a posture of weakness, regardless of the medium? These questions hopefully show the need for much more exegetical (and expositional) work needed before we conclude “thus sayeth…”3. It seems clear that there is a fundamental disagreement over whether or not a medium can be “redeemed” or used correctly for God glorifying means. I’m okay with disagreeing here. But I’m not sure why this issue doesn’t then fall under Romans 14. It’s not just your opinion; certainly many other people agree with you. But I don’t see why this is not in the CATEGORY of “opinion”/weak-conscious issue. It would be whole different story if you would have written a blog-post about why hip-hop is a stumbling block for you; that you have a hard time not hearing only aggression and anger; and that you’d like for other bothers & sisters to help you in your weakness. I would gladly say amen to that & never play hip-hop in your presence. Amen, no questions asked. But to claim hip-hop is an irredeemable medium and that the YYR movement is in error for embracing this is a much different thing. A claim like that needs a much larger theological/exegetical foundation than what you have provided in your 2 posts….which is why blogs are not a good medium for this kind of discussion!
Maybe a Connected Kingdom Podcast with Challies….and Mark Dever, or Shai Linne, or Eric Mason on the other line?
Nick: I just want to quickly respond to your one part of your last comment. It appears that we have both confused each other a little. Under (1) you said:No christian-rap artist is physically “chasing hypocrites out of the churches with whips”…nor are they advocating anyone else do so. So why do you use such an exaggerated example? No rap-artist would agree with that. It seems really unhelpful (and uncharitable) to say things that no one on either side would advocate.I’m sorry, I was under the impression that your previous comment was using this example of temple-cleansing to justify physical aggression for spiritual purposes. And in my last comment I was simply saying that I was sure that you (and no Rapper either) were not really advocating that any of us get the whips out next Sunday!I promise I’ll try to get to the rest of your comment at some point this week, but I hope this clears up that misunderstanding.
Yep, I see that now, makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
I am a white anglo-saxon protestant who grew up in the suburbs with wealthy parents. Over the course of my life I’ve listened to very diverse genres of music from Stryper, to more recent metal bands like For Today and With Blood Comes Cleansing and also now rappers like Lecrae, Trip Lee, and Shai Linne. To me I think its less of people saying, “Hm, how can I reach the lost of the inner-city” and then leaving their church culture to go do that, but rather people using the gifts and the passions that were already in their life but switching out the content to glorify God. If someone who is an incredible guitar player gets saved should they set aside their guitar because metal is a violent satanic genre or should they use their guitar for the glory of God? Also I think emotions that the music brings out aren’t quite as universal as you make them out. I don’t quite know what you mean by “aggression” but for me I know that rap music motivates me to kill sin in my life and to go hard in evangelism. Me and my friends had a great time rapping along together to “Go Hard” in on a mission trip in China as “Go Hard” has several lyrics about China in it. It motivated us to push on in evangelism and not fear any persecution. While Christian rappers may be aggressive but it is always aggression towards rooting out sin. At other times they are very weak and say things that are very “shameful” advocating Biblical manhood and womanhood, loving your wife like Christ loved the church, being humble, submitting to elders and authority. Its not only aggression but covers the wide range of topics and emotions that could be encountered in the Christian life. For me I just have a really hard time making the call on if one thing is only a little bit influenced by sin and so can be redeemed and used by the church and another is so influenced and permeated by sin that it can’t be redeemed. If it was people instead of music genre I know that we would say that God has the power to redeem anyone that He’d like to redeem so I think its the same with rap music. God has shown His power in transforming something that is horrid in the secular world to very God-glorifying.So as it stands I’m edified, encouraged, educated and even enjoy myself when listening to rap. You’re argument based on “the medium is the message” is not enough to convince me. Thanks for the posts and the discussions
1. All right your ignorance of hip hop is obvious with this. First off hip hop culture doesn’t always mean rap. There is a difference between rap and hip hop and anybody involved in hip hop culture knows this. Also, how can you define the hip hop culture? It’s a very broad culture and I don’t think it is possible. To me it is like trying to figure out hipster culture. 2. I’m skipping two, because I don’t think that deserves a response. If hip hop can’t be used in public worship than any new contemporary worship can’t be used since that comes from Pagan ideas.3. This question is crazy to me; your bias coming into this is so seen in your take of hip hop. Comparing hip hop to this point “Would you evangelize in Alabama wearing a Ku Klux Klan outfit?” Really? Baggy jeans don’t mean black violence. White men wear baggy jeans, plus white men wear baggy jeans to church. Yes, baggy jeans are a part of hip hop culture. Jay-Z’s new book Decoded talks about it. To continue with number 3, you said this, “That’s why when God came to earth to save sinners, His medium was a weak and vulnerable baby boy in an animal’s feeding trough. What a medium, what a message!” Your argument on medium is crazy with this. Yes, Jesus was born of a virgin. But Jesus didn’t stay a baby, he grew and learned and then started his ministry when he wasn’t a baby. So, looking at it that way, can’t we do the same with hip hop? Hip hop is still young and needs to learn and grow and if the church isn’t willing to do that, we might lose a whole generation of people that the church can’t reach without it.4. You said, “I am grieved by our selfish individualism, our materialistic greed, our cruel abuses of power, our blatant and subtle racism, and so much more.” This is about white culture. So, with all of this said why is white culture the one who is allowed to define what the church can and can not do? You mentioned racism a couple times now. In my opinion, you are being racist with this whole thing. You don’t properly understand the culture (this isn’t even arguable, it is obvious) and since it is a different culture you are saying it is wrong. 5. “Well no, because, as we saw above, the medium also has to be considered. I’m sure few would argue that the way to reach American white supremacists is to dress up in white sheets, pointy hats, and carry flaming crosses while preaching the Gospel” Once again you are using comparing hip hop culture to white racism. These two things aren’t even close. First off whites are involved in hip hop culture. Macklemore and Eminem are examples of this. So, hip hop culture can’t be defined as just black like you are trying to do with your examples of white racism. Right now I want you to go and study hip hop again. Listen to the lyrics of KRS-One, a true hip hop artist. These men (hip hop artists) are trying to correct the wrongs in society. Some use violent messages, but these men use violent messages because that is what they see everyday. They see the corrupt white men going into their areas and beating the crap out of them. All they know is violence. So, how do we change this? We allow Christian rap to now come into the city with a new message, showing that violence isn’t the only way to rebel against corrupt, most times white institutions. If we don’t allow Christian rap to come into the church we will never be able to reach a lost generation that the gospel truly represents. It doesn’t represent us white rich people. It represents the poor and beaten, which are the people in the inner city.
I find this topic very interesting. Thank you so much for shedding light on a growing trend in Christian music.I have been a hip-hop head since I was 5 years old. I listened to Mike Peace, P.O.D., and Stephen Wiley on my cassette at the same age I was learning to read. Listening to hip-hop at a young age and being able to retain most of it taught me a lot about the Gospel, and even the bible as a whole. Memorizing songs like Wiley’s “Bible Break” even now i see as a great tool for knowing my books of the bible. Also, it is current artists such as LeCrae, Thi’sl, Ambassador, R-Swift, and Flame with great gospel-centric songs that I believe God can use to saturate the hip-hop culture with His word and Truth. Ambassador has a degree from seminary in Philadelphia. You can’t look at one song out of an entire catalog and make judgment based on that (well, i guess you can.. because you did).I feel like we could turn the clock back to the 80′s and have the same discussion on how Metal should not be used to reach people for Christ, or even before that and debate on the effectiveness of using Rock N’ Roll to spread the Gospel. “Look at what the Rock N’ Roll culture is rooted in”… Although I would suppose you’re a fan of Larry Norman or Keith Green. “But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.” - Phillippians 1:18
You are not being over-sensitive! I greatly appreciated this thoughtful analysis of the Christian rap movement. As I expressed in a post earlier this year ( http://onebrightcorner.blogspot.com/2010/02/doctrine-of-grateful-dead.html ) even Plato and Aristotle recognized that music has moral qualities that can affect one’s behavior! These ancients did not even want men who were training for a position in the government to listen to soft, gentle music for fear that they would become spineless men. While I don’t carry it to that extent (-: I believe Christians today have fallen into the trap of analyzing only the words of a song, and ignoring the medium, as you so eloquently put it. Music is not amoral, and I want to encourage you, David, as a first-time reader of your blog as you stand in what I believe is a Biblical yet unpopular position.
I’ve read both of your Holy Hip Hop posts and most of the comments on both. I disagree with your main thesis. I think Jesus can reveal himself through rap music and capture a person’s heart.Here is where I see a deeper issue in this conversation: it’s one thing to express ideas about Jesus, it’s another thing entirely when Jesus expresses himself through us. Jesus is still alive, and he is still the medium and the message. However, now he’s not limited to one human body. He can express himself in a rap song or a sermon or a conversation or an act or a letter or a tweet. Jesus expresses himself any time believers act in obedience to his word and spirit.I don’t believe sermons and preaching are as sacred and ordained as you indicate in both of your posts. I’ve heard very few testimonies where a person knew nothing of Jesus and then instantly followed Jesus after one sermon (or rap song/conversation/act/letter/tweet). Jesus can use a sermon to lead a person to that hour of first belief, but I believe he uses many other media on the road to that point.In most testimonies I’ve heard, the believer tells of multiple encounters with Jesus and his story. These encounters include verbal, non-verbal, written, musical, and even contemplative experiences. Time after time, Jesus reveals himself in just the right ways and at just the right times, through just the right people so that one lost child finally confesses and believes and follows.Many people associate rap music with negative or sinful experiences. I would guess that Jesus won’t use rap to reveal himself to those people. I believe Jesus is smart enough to reveal himself through obedient believers by prompting them with just the right messages and just the right media. Even when the Gospel is presented poorly, Jesus continues to reveal himself to save souls. Praise God we have such a Savior.
David Murray: Can you provide us with examples of music that have a gospel-compatible background? I posted this question on your last post. Hip-hop’s detractors were surprisingly silent as to positive suggestions, seeming much more adept at critique. A convincing answer would do much to persuade people to your position.
OK, here’s my last word on the subject (I hope).http://headhearthand.posterous.com/lunch-with-a-christian-rapper
It is early and I can’t really think that well. I viewed the videos and was appalled. I had to stop mid-way through.God’s sovereignty is one of the hardest things to accept. it makes even the best of us bristle. The difference between us and an ordinary christian is that we live and die on God’s sovereignty. We are who are reformed that is..it inevitably follows if God is sovereign he will do things which we can’t comprehend or don’t like.So if we admit that God is sovereign than there is no need to question racial superiority. One need not live amongst Indians and Pakistanis and homosexuals as such. One could read the Bible along racial lines and be completely justified in it. Yes if you really want to you can say it is right for the sons of Ham to be slaves perpetually this would not be wrong in the absolute sense.The Bible is full of racial ideas. The Hebrews were a particular race a race devoted to the right worship of God while the rest of the world dwelt in absolute ignorance. The Hebrew was conscious of his racial superiority hence his constant references to Abraham.Now also as reformed believers we know that God chooses certain people races and nations and gives them a great degree of light and truth. The thing is if he chooses a certain race then it automatically leads to an inferior race. If I have more light than I am superior to you who has no light. You cannot have the reformed faith without this thinking. You need not have this thinking to be christian. Hence a christian will look at exodus from the standpoint of God freeing the oppressed and downtrodden. A reformed person will see it from God’s love not to the oppressed so much but to an elect race.Now if one got into a boat and traveled northwest from Jerusalem one would reach Athens. Athens is important because it is there you have the great Socrates. Apparently he is a very important figure because he represents the highest attainment one man can reach too apart from Christ in terms of philosophy. Now Socrates is important also because he is Greek. The Greeks invented Europe and the West. They were quite aware of racial superiority. They knew their neighbors to the East were quite inferior and they brought light and civilization to their neighbors. Now I think God too was conscious of their superiority and indeed made them that way Himself. Apart from the Hebrew race itself the Greeks and Romans have been indispensable in God’s plan with respect to the Lord. But all these groups were conscience of their racial superiority. Now take christianity for example it is essentially a white man religion. It took deep root in Europe. God has ordained it to be a white man religion in the truest sense. The very language which gives it the fullest expression apart from the semitic languages are Greek and Latin languages spoken by whites. This is an incredible closeness which no one who is mortal can wrest away.Now a white man if he really wanted too could say that christianity is his religion and that God is his God. He would not be wrong. But wait isn’t that what all people who follow the reformed faith have always stated. He would not be wrong in saying this. A Hebrew living in ancient Israel could approach an Amelikite and say to him God is not your God he is my God. And he could show him proof. He could take him to the temple built by Solomon and say there here is proof. If one went to Europe one would see proof. ‘Tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem so massive a task it was to found the Roman race’ I would say so massive a task it was to have this great christian religion from men like Tertullian and Beza. If one wants to study Latin or Greek one must work incredibly hard and if one wants to be a reformed christian one must work hard also. It is a disgrace to even be talking about rap music playing any role in the reformed faith whatsoever. It is like asking a man who can’t read to translate Ovid or Virgil from the original Latin.Lastly the Greeks and the Romans wherever they went they brought light and civilization. If they brought these things that must mean the people they brought them too did not possess them hence they were superior to those people. Although they built great cities and infrastructures throughout the Mediterrinian and as far as India they nonetheless allowed the conquered to worship their ancestral gods and they even worshiped those god’s themselves. Now thousands of years after after christianity had taken root in Europe and you have the European once again conquering the world. They do the exact same thing the Romans and Greek had done. they built effective cities modeled after the cities in their home countries. The only difference this time was that whereas before the European would have worshiped the local deity he was keenly aware of God and how his civility and him being a true man rested upon his worship of the one true God and to worship a local Indian god would have made him a monster. Now the European in bringing light and civilization to the world was saying that the God that he worshiped must be worshiped. But that this worship was and could not be separated for the light and civilization he had also brought. The two were inseparable. But was not the light and civility white western civilization and hence if you could not separate the two then whiteness could not be separated from christianity.Lastly, Adam Smith who through keen observation gave us a great understanding of how modern societies function economically was raised in one of the godliest place on earth. It cannot be denied that his observations of the people in that society was an observation of christian behavior or civilized behavior. If you question this take an ordinary citizen of that era and compare his biblical knowledge to a great christian of today and you will have your answer. There is no denying that capitalism is right because it originates from a christian society. It maybe hard to swallow the idea of capitalism but truth is oftentimes hard to swallow.David