“For the powerful, crimes are those that others commit.” ― Noam Chomsky
Click image for full size
Many people over the years have expressed concern with the way Bill Gothard misuses Scripture—not to mention basic logic—in his attempts to validate his dogmatic pseudo-spiritual requirements for “successful” living. A friend of mine recently shared a document (pictured) obtained while attending an IBLP (Institute in Basic Life Principles) conference on effective communication. In this document, Bill Gothard argues that only a “carnally minded” individual would use rock music in the local church. One can see Bill’s total disregard for basic biblical hermeneutics, and how he creates a false logical argument in which he is correct and those who differ are in sin.
A Christian teenager who enjoys Christian rock music asked the following question:
“Let’s suppose that Christian rock music would cause only a few to be damaged, but would cause many more to grow in their worship of God. Would it be wrong in this case?"
Right off the bat, there is a presupposition that “Christian rock music” (I hate the term because it’s so general as to not allow for song-by-song or genre-by-genre analyses) can cause people to be damaged. I’ve addressed this issue specifically in another Recovering Grace article. Basically, after spending seven years in graduate school studying this issue, I do not believe there is any evidence (scientific, musical, or otherwise) that a style of music can “damage” someone. Nor do I believe that a style can “cause” someone to grow in their worship. Music CAN be an effective tool for worship and it can also be an effective tool to communicate sinful ideas, but there is no evidence that a specific style can cause these things to happen.
Jesus often exposed the wrong logic of an argument by giving an analogy. Let's suppose that a restaurant had only one in every ten customers get food poisoning, but the majority were greatly benefited by the food.
There isn’t anything wrong with using analogies to make a point. However, in an attempt to spiritualize things, Gothard invokes the name of Christ. This gives the subtle impression that since Jesus’ words were truth, then Gothard’s must be as well. And while we certainly can glean rhetorical insights from the teaching methods of Christ, His use of analogies to present truth does not necessarily guarantee the truthfulness of our use of analogies.
What would the law of man require?
Even though the majority of the customers were benefited by the food, the health department would close down the restaurant until the cause of food poisoning was identified and removed.
Okay, but in our analogy we still haven’t proven that there was “food poisoning” (damage from rock music) to begin with.
What would the law of God require?
The law of God is summarized in the law of love which states: "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died… It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, or any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak" (Romans 14:15, 21)
This is a classic Gothard tactic right here. He takes two verses (that are six verses apart) and combines them with ellipses. Now, before we look at the quoted passage, think with me for just a moment. Is the law of God truly summarized in Romans 14 as Bill suggests? Not according to Jesus. In Matthew 22, He was directly asked what was the most important commandment, to which He replied that we are to love the Lord our God with our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to love our neighbors as ourselves. Christ then states that the entire law of God hangs upon those two commands. Not Romans 14.
Now, it could possibly be argued that Bill is stating that Christians should avoid rock music out of love for their neighbors. And that would be a valid point if not for the fact that music styles cannot cause one to sin, and if not for the fact that the main point of Romans 14 counteracts Bill’s argument. Romans 14 is where Paul addresses the “meat offered to idols” issue. Paul’s judgment is that there is nothing wrong with eating the meat, but that each of us must walk in faith before God and with charity toward our fellow Christians. So, if after consideration of Scripture and the feelings of the church body, a local church decides to utilize contemporary music in its services, then there is nothing wrong with that according to Paul’s teaching in this passage.
The responsibility of pastors when even one is damaged:
“How think ye? If a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray" (Matthew 18:12-13).
“Woe be to the shepherds… The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed of that which was sick, neither have you down to that which was broken, neither have you brought again that which was driven away, neither have you sought that which was lost” (Ezekiel 34:1–4)
Eisegesis alert. Bill has cherry-picked two passages unrelated to the issue at hand to supposedly support his argument. The Matthew 18 parable speaks of Christ’s desperate love for His children. It speaks nothing of a pastor’s role as shepherd or of rock music. The Ezekiel passage is even further off target. Church pastors didn’t exist in the Old Testament, so it can’t be referring to them. It’s actually a prophetic passage aimed at Israel’s community leaders, and it has nothing to do with pastors or rock music.
The serious warning about offending just one believer:
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were for better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6)
This passage is quite powerful. Christians have an important duty to do everything within our power to not cause a fellow believer to sin. If using contemporary music in the local church could cause someone to fall away from Christ, then Bill would have an argument here. But it can’t. And he doesn’t. Don’t let him fool you.
Those who reject this teaching are carnally minded:
"For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:6–8).
This is Bill’s way of saying, “either you agree with me, or you are a carnal Christian.” But what about all of the “spiritually minded” people who have no problem with contemporary music in the local church? Let’s take a closer look at what this whole “spiritually/carnally minded” thing actually means. One verse prior to Gothard’s excerpt, Paul writes that those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh and those that live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. Rejecting Gothard’s teaching on rock music doesn’t make one carnally minded; walking according to the flesh does. Unfortunately, many have been lured into bondage by Gothard’s scriptural sleight-of-hand, including myself once upon a time.
You know though, the interesting thing is that I don’t really believe Gothard believes what he wrote in this document. Sure, I think he believes that rock music is sinful and should be kept out of the local church. But he would never use this kind of thought process to examine his own ministry. Imagine if the first paragraph of the document had said:
"A Christian teenager who enjoys IBLP, ATI, and the teachings of Bill Gothard asked the following question:
"Let’s suppose that Bill Gothard’s teachings would cause only a few to be damaged, but would cause many more to grow in their worship of God. Would it be wrong in this case?"
Now, consider the fact that this very website serves as a testimony of THOUSANDS of damaged believers. Hmm…
Your last point is the most valid point made.
CCM IMHO is as worldly as can be and is (by and large)a sad commentary on American Christianity, again, IMHO.
I would be curious as to what criteria you are using to make that statement. I am a classically trained musician teaching choral music on the collegiate level, and for musical reasons find fault with much commercial Christian music. But I'm not sure "wordly" is the label I'd slap on it. There are a lot of devoted brothers and sisters in Christ in that industry.
His Pastor said it, and he believes it, and that's just okay with him...
dude, you really have no clue about me, my background, my church or my biblical knowledge and, quite frankly, I find your comment to be offensive and shallow.
Suggestion: I think that grateful's comment does not hold water but may I suggest we go after the content rather than stating assumptions about the person?
This article is great! And I loved your last point especially!
I personally find a lot of CCM music to be theologically shallow and musically simplistic and repetitive, but there is some really great stuff out there too! I grew up under BG and S.M. Davis' teaching on rock music and watched it tear my family apart while things like sexual abuse in the home were deliberately ignored. The shallow and temporary things like music and dress wer made gospel while we were taught very little real Bible doctrine at all. The hypocrisy of it all made me sick and I would be quite content to never hear an argument on music styles for the rest of my life... In my opinion, if GOd wanted his people fighting over music styes he would have spelled out what was right or wrong music styles. Music should never be an issue amongst Christians.And I have very little patience for people who put it up there with doctrine and the Gospel. MUsic is at the very best a personal standard. Not a black and white ultimatum anyone can force on anyone else. IMO.
"Revelation is full of worship, but most of it is extremely repetitive. The elders and the flying beasts around the throne say one or two phrases over and over throughout eternity without stopping. The great multitude sings a song with a very short text." http://mauriceoverholt.com/2013/05/22/holier-than-thou-repetitive-songs-versus-wordy-hymns/
Some might argue that the Hallelujah chorus is theologically simplistic and repetitive. That does not make it bad. Sometimes we need simple reminders like the song "God is so good" because it is so easy to forget basic truths.
EXCELLENT article. Thank you for pointing out the flawed logic that BIll Gothard uses. He truly has a double standard. For the record, my relationship with Christ has been greatly strengthened and enriched by my exposure to CCM. My husband and I recently attended a concert by Stephen Curtis Chapman and my spirit was lifted in praise and surrender to God in a glorious way. As I heard Stephen share some of his life story and testimony of God's faithfulness through the difficult times in their journey, I could not help wonder why IBLP called this "Carnal". By believing that lie for so long, I missed out on some great spiritual blessings and encouragement.
I think everyone forgets where the church got its inspiration for much of the music we use for traditional hymns today.. several hundred years ago, from the saloons. 'Nuff said, I think? Btw, I love most of the old hymns, they're beautiful, artistic, and I also love much of the CCM that is used in my church, some of my most wonderful, and meaningful worship has been while using both styles.
actually the saloon music legend has been refuted as inaccurate (in the case of John and Charles Wesley and Luther, anyway)although Fanny Crosby did put her poems and hymns to popular tunes of her time.
I personally don't care whether one can say that the Wesleys used bar songs or not, but I would suggest that there are not sharp black and white lines separating one set of music from another. This article gives a sense of some of that: http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Learning-Center/FAQs/Tavern-Tunes.aspx Part of what makes a good drinking song would be an easy tune for normal people to learn and sing, but that's also going to be true of folk music and a lot of other popular music, including tunes created for commercials. But then that is exactly what many hymn and worship music authors have attempted to do as well: create music that is relatively easy to to learn and sing for us normal folks.
Another example in that vein - was the Star Spangled Banner originally a drinking song? http://www.colonialmusic.org/Resource/Anacreon.htm But honestly, does it make any real difference either way?
Different but with a related thought, an irreverent example of how popular songs tend to have a lot in common: http://youtu.be/oOlDewpCfZQ (f-bomb used once towards the end) My only point with that example being the amount of common themes that appear in songs. If you were remove a few chord progressions from the repertoire, it seems that many songs would have to disappear with them.
I love your logic, John. Great article! It's not about the music, but rather is BG using scripture rightly.
On a closely related topic, has everyone noticed how the typography of all his literature looks so old? I see the document with the fonts, styles etc, and it looks like it was printed in the 1970s. I'm sure it's not a conscious decision on IBLP's part, but there seems to be the attitude that the old ways were way more godly.
They use their own fonts. Working at ITC, we had those fonts on our computer. Everything used them.
That attitude pervades the entirety of all things ATI and IBLP. Look at the men's hairstyles, for example. I also remember a strong trend of glorifying Old Southern history, the stringent and oppressive rules for females and so on. It was glamorized, and the ideas of slavery overlooked, if not actually suggested that it wasn't so bad, etc.. Possibly the fact that the clothing and architectural styles were breathtakingly beautiful made it a bit easier to glamorize the actual culture of the day, but still.. That, and the Victorian Era had it's fair share of attention, at least in my experience.
Thank you for writing this, Dr. Cornish.
Whenever I see Christian authors use ellipses it raises doubts for me.
When you look closely at ANYTHING published by Institute writers, the ellipses is practically a road sign for "Watch carefully. We are about to make scripture say something NEW." In 99.9% of those cases, new equals something NOT intended by the author or considered by the original audience. It is nauseating to think of just *how many* times this happened and the ways in which people changed their whole lives to conform to proof texted "principles" that simply DON'T exist.
Grateful to RG for drawing attention to this.
It still amazes me how I swallowed these arguments as a young teen, hook, line, and sinker. I feel ashamed of myself, when I remember what a Pharisee I was about others' music. I am also a classically trained musician, although not nearly to the level of Dr. Cornish. I studied music history and theory for several years. That was the beginning of my doubts as to the validity of the arguments made by ATI about the sinfulness of rock music.
I still kept some of the material that was handed out at the Sound Foundations program, until I decided to research the claims in the material. I found it was all assumption and lies. One of the big claims made was that the rock beat originated with animistic rituals from Africa. Some of the writers argued that even traditional spirituals should be avoided because of that connection.
Since I left ATI behind, I have had the opportunity to work in an African country. I have heard the 'talking' drums, and I have seen animism practiced. There is no more link between the two than there is between pipe organs and vampirism. Most of the rituals don't even use music.
The drums are mostly used in celebrations, like weddings. The rhythms [far more complex than the ATI nonsense about the 'evil' emphasis on the 2nd and 4th beat] are joyful and refreshing. The reason they are called 'talking' is not because of a secret code, but because the drummers imitate the natural rhythms of language. I heard one drummer play for church, and he practically sang the traditional English hymns with his drum - you could almost hear the words, he imitated the speech patterns so well.
I still don't like most CCM. That is mostly due to personal preference. It definitely isn't because of the beat, unless it is because most Western drummers now sound like amateurs after hearing African drummers :D
Additionally, I think that some of the "African music is pagan" attitude is racism left over from the days of slavery and of believing that Whites were either more evolved or were endowed by God as being something better than Black people. There are still people today who have some holdover beliefs about "the curse of Ham."
It's a lot more complex than just one thing, and not all that Elvis did was great, but one thing Elvis did was to help bridge a racial gap. From wiki: "Racists attacked rock and roll because of the mingling of black and white people it implied and achieved, and because of what they saw as black music's power to corrupt through vulgar and animalistic rhythms..." The claim is made there that White covers of Black music would outsell the original artist, revealing that "many Americans wanted black music without the black people in it." (quotes at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_impact_of_Elvis_Presley)
I think there are well-meaning people who think that they are on the side of the angels but who are actually looking at African culture and music as a whole through eyes dimmed by a received tradition of racism.
Regarding the Spirituals: I have gained a lot of respect for the wisdom and spirituality of those people who endured so much wrong and suffering. A great book is "Beyond the Suffering" (http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Suffering-Embracing-Spiritual-Direction/dp/0801068061). It's honest but not depressing or attacking. It is hopeful and helpful. It looks into the soul care practiced by African Americans who lived through such difficult experiences. Far from turning me off to the spirituals, their history makes me want to know more about them, and about the remarkable souls who sang them.
The idea of some white people of that time that Africans and African culture at large was all pagan while the White folks were somehow superior was mistaken. There were Black folks who found ways to retain dignity and to still love God and others in spite of being physically, sexually, emotionally, verbally, spiritually assaulted in horrible ways. Their "owners" would go to church and sing the respectable music as opposed to the "pagan" music, but in God's eyes who was really being the pagans?
Sorry to hijack your post, Quiet One. You said it well and touched on a thought I have been wanting to express for a while.
"Bill is stating that Christians should avoid rock music out of love for their neighbors."
but what if your neighbors are young rock music loving party goers...? If they hear nothing but the "old hymns" from your house they will never have any common ground with christianity ---Back in the 70's Jesus movement Christian music with a beat is what drew many young people to hear the good news because the music was something they identified with.
You can't refute bad logic with bad logic of your own..... Reaching your rocker neighbors will be done by extending the love of Christ to them rather than blasting CCM from your own stereo. If some square dude who only played hymns but lovingly interacted with them was compared to the CCM neighbor that judged them, who would they hear when it came to wanting to know more about God?
I thought two negatives make a postitive. I never was good at math or logic, but I was speaking theoretically. I agree showing them love is the best thing but showing Mr. Bill Christian love is seems not to be working very well.
[…] Google Blog Source- Christian Music […]
I grew up on hymns. Many are wonderful and still hold up today. There are some that are very sentimental or not even theologically sound (do Lord, or do Lord, o do remember me? How could He not?). I approach CCM the same way. There is wonderful, worshipful, theologically sound music. There are other songs that will be popular for a little while, and then disappear. I sing in my church's choir and we sing both hymns and the better CCM pieces. For the record, I've been around. I remember when Larry Norman was popular, and my friends and I would try to get to his concerts undetected by older people from church.
My mom always used to sing that song this way: "You do, Lord; you do, Lord; you DO remember me!" It added an extra note in there, but she didn't like asking God to do what He'd already promised to do.
“Let’s suppose that Bill Gothard’s teachings would cause only a few to be damaged, but would cause many more to grow in their worship of God. Would it be wrong in this case?”
First of all, EVERYONE who follows the teachings of Bill Gothard is damaged -- even the ones who don't think so. I'm sure the Galatians were happy and content bewitched under, "another gospel." Ask the JW's or Mormons if they think they are damaged by the teachings in their cult. They will say they have been greatly helped. The Truth sets us free -- what Gothard teaches is not the Truth. It is deception. That is why the ones damaged the most are the ones happy under it -- totally deceived. Everyone is damaged because Bill Gothard doesn't merely teach wrong THINGS about Christianity. Rather, he teaches a false Christianity -- another gospel. Christianity is not a religious system of ANY kind. Christianity is CHRIST IN US.
I love music of all kinds. Yes even secular. I listen and ask myself is the message true or false? Is the music artistically good or bad? How does coming in contact with this improve my life or understanding? Listening with examining is essential.
A few years back someone asked me how I could listen to secular music as a Christian. I let them know that many times secular music gives us a clear picture of the hearts of our mission field. I used these lyrics as an example, "I'm just waiting for that cold black sun-cracked soul of mine to come alive." The person writing those lyrics is searching, yet doesn't know where to find the answer. Many of this person's fans sing those lyrics and are searching. So many Christians hear the rock beat and run away from their mission field frightened that they will become contaminated. The line before those lyrics says, "I don't need to be forgiven." My heart breaks because it is a clear picture of someone longing for life, yet rejects the path that leads to life everlasting.
In my family, I had long talks with my teen concerning how to approach all music in an honest way that honors God and them. I would only allow him to take the next step when they could demonstrate maturity with what had been already taught.
My Son is now a man. He loves his Lord and Savior. He knows his Bible cover to cover. He rejoices in God's goodness daily. The music never wooed him. Jesus did.
Mr. Gothard wants us to walk in the of fear of falling and failing.
In Christ Jesus we have been buried with Him and raise in a newness of life. There is no longing for things of this world when we understand that ours is the Kingdom of God.
Nancy can you explain what you mean by taking the next step? I am a single mom raising 2 young daughters. We listen to all types of music together. I was married to a very legalistic man and when the girls go to visit him he strongly disapproves of the types of music I allow them to listen to. I want my daughters to grow up to love the Lord and to honor Him in every respect.
Thank you
It has to do with incremental development Just as with physical development we wouldn't expect a crawling child to run if they don't know how to walk, with the arts there are steps of analysis we can teach our children. Each child is different based on their present understanding. As I would listen to my son's thoughts I would get a general picture of his understanding. It is hard to describe without an example.
When my son was around 3 I would put on classical music. We would dance around the house to the Nutcracker. He knew the story and would emotionally feel the intensity of the music change. He would say things like, "The Mouse King is fighting hard." "That Fritz was mean made Marie sad." "They are in love like you and Daddy." He began to understand at a young age that music has the ability to convey emotional content without a word spoken. He knew while dancing around the room that music could make him feel like he was in the story.
Fast forward several years to age 8-10 now he is at an age where he is developing in his understanding of right and wrong. He started connecting many things he did out of blind obedience to his new found relationship with Jesus. He started understanding how loving someone gives a person the desire to do what is right although we are not always successful. He learns about forgiveness. We talk about lyrics. Some lyrics fit into the life he has chosen. Some express something different.
Over the next few years I would look at different philosophies and try to break them down to his age level of understanding. I will never forget Hegel and his haggling hypothesis. Simplified it was "If I have 'A' and you have 'C' what is wrong with us both getting together at 'B'? Through those discussions he learned about the dangers of compromise. Now as we listened to music he understood how music emotionally moving a person could open them up to compromise through lyrics. At the same time as we discussed Hegel we discussed Antithesis. 'A' is 'A' and cannot be 'Non-A'. There is true truth.
We would not allow him to listen to anything between the ages of 6-12 without discussing the way the music makes you feel and what worldview the lyrics revealed. If they were lyrics from an unknown worldview to him we would stop and find a way of helping him understand what the music and lyrics desired to share. We would talk about how it differed or agreed with our own belief system. We would talk about people who did not know God and how that impacts a musical artists words and understanding of the world. He never feared sharing with his father and I so there was a continual stream of questions and thoughts to be discussed. He started taking trumpet and piano lessons by 11 years old, and with every composer we introduced a new philosopher from that time period.
Ages 13 and up the patterns for open discussions were established. He learned if he felt melancholy gloomy music made it worse. If he was feeling like throwing caution to the wind he would be wise to refrain from music with don't care lyrics. He talked about the need to experience music responsibly as opposed to limiting his experiences.
I'm sorry to be long winded. I don't know how to convey the forming of each step or how I knew when he was ready for the next. As a mother with open communication and a no fear style of parenting I knew when he was ready next just by listening to what he had to say. I also had to step back and see how the Holy Spirit was moving my son in his understanding of the fallen world we live in. I would pray for the Holy Spirit to guide me in knowing when he was ready for more advanced conversations and pray for wisdom to keep me from moving beyond what his years could handle. Without answers to these prayers I would have been lost.
The next step will be different for each child. Phyllis trust the Holy Spirit to guide you with your daughters. He loves you and them. Give your daughers a place of openness and help them face the unknowns with new understanding and no fear.