Proving the Music Issue in the Worship War: Is there Holy Hip Hop?

Last week in evangelicalism, a sizeable controversy arose over a panel discussion at the national conference for The National Center for Family-Integrated Churches (NCFIC).  The conference was on the Worship of God and the session was a six man panel answering, "What about Holy Hip Hop?"  The reason I knew about it was because Scott Aniol of Religious Affections was on the panel, and I read it at his blog, where another discussion erupted where he posted the video.

I had no idea what an evangelical group might say about rap music, but all six were against it for several various reasons, unanimous in their opposition to rap as worship.  It was a pleasant surprise to me.  There's no way it should be a surprise, but it really is today in evangelicalism to have a group public and open against rap music.  However, I was also surprised at the harsh and overwhelming reaction to the panel all over evangelicalism.  Many big named evangelicals commented against the panel, using some of the worst possible language to describe it.  John Piper, Albert Mohler, Paige Patterson, Ligon Duncan, and Douglas Wilson were just a few of the names of those who said something against it, and themselves supported "reformed rap."  At the NCFIC site itself, there were zero supporters that I read.  Several prominent bloggers attacked and scolded the panel with heated vitriol.

Even at Scott's Religious Affections blog, he mainly got opposition.  Of those who supported him, the support was weak and apologetic.  There was little to no support against rap. Perhaps those who support would know what kind of reaction they might get, and decided not to go through the abuse.  Of those who showed up to that conversation, two were pretty well known "reformed rappers"  -- Shai Linne and Curtis Allen, a.k.a., The Voice -- who both stated their displeasure publically.  Very ironic is that Ligon Duncan and Paige Patterson both gave big endorsement to Scott Aniol's Worship in Song, which absolutely rejects rap music, and then they write posts against Scott Aniol's panel discussion.  This is incomprehensible, but now typical in evangelicalism, such blatant contradiction.  I don't want anything to do with it.  Don't endorse it if you don't agree with it.  Albert Mohler comes out for the reformed rap, even though he says that in his head he's against it, that it contradicts transcendental beauty, as objective as truth and goodness.  He never explains why it's actually OK (I have dealt with Mohler in the past on this here and here).  I haven't read one substantive post from anyone that supports the panel and is against rap.  None.  Does that surprise you?  Is that where we're at today?

Should we argue about music?  Are there any authoritative arguments against rap music for worship?  Is rap music actually permissible and appropriate for worshiping God?  Most of my readers, I would think, would answer, "Yes, yes, and then no"  How would we word those arguments or explain them to someone who thought rap was appropriate or permissible?   Here are links of other things I've written on rap music here (here, here, and here).  I reference it in several other posts.  I believe that if someone won't listen to or isn't open to these arguments or this explanation, they probably are a lost cause on the issue anyway.

Historically, Christians have opposed some music.  Not as along ago, Christians opposed some music to be used in church.  Today we have professing Christians who think that there isn't any type of music forbidden in church and especially on your own personal playlist.  Are they right?  Were Christians wrong before and we've reached a heightened place of spiritual enlightenment today?  We've grown as Christians in that we now have any form of music in the church used as worship?

Someone recently wrote to me that the burden of proof is on the "ultra conservatives" to prove why Christians can't use rap or rock for worship.  What they want, it seems, is for us to push "play" on the Bible and play the music styles of which God approves.  However, like many other issues, we've got to use biblical principles and make application.  The problem today at a fundamental level is that most professing Christians don't believe any application of scripture is authoritative, but it is all preferential or non-essential.  They don't believe we can be sure about which are the words of the Bible, the meaning of the Bible, the doctrine of the Bible, so especially we can't be sure about its application.  With that as audience, it's going to be difficult to meet a burden of proof, but for those who care, here's the short of it.

One, we are to prove all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Two, music has meaning.

Music (sans words) expresses, according to scripture sorrow and joy.  Isaiah 23:15 says that someone can sing like a harlot.  Lamentations 3:14 speaks of a mocking song. 1 Corinthians 14:8 says that a trumpet with its sound can communicate different messages.  I've never met anyone in the world who doesn't know this.  The only people I know, who don't believe that music isn't neutral, that it does have meaning in and of itself, are professing believers.  They hang on to this lie so that they can use whatever music they want.

Three, as an addendum to two -- since music is a means of communication, it can communicate moral or immoral.

Music is a language, and scripture says not to let filthy communication proceed out of your mouth. Music can communicate good or bad language.  Man's communication relates to man as a moral creature, as moral agents capable of either good or evil.  Since man's fall, whatever people create is a potential expression of sin.  Man does not by nature act morally, so everything that he does or makes is subject to judgment.  We should judge man's communication.

More to Come