I had thought about posting this before the end of last year, but this is so egregious that it transcends single calendar years. Bad theology is only a fraction of the problem. Bad music — a tune that you cannot get out of your head quickly (so beware) — goes a long way in explaining its poverty. But the icing on the cake is the setting. You’d almost think California was solely capable of producing such vulgarity. But then along comes Florida with the reminder that fruits and nuts grow in all temperate climes.
This video is even worse than Christian hip hop (hat tip to the folks at Gospel Coalition who don’t seem to be worried about the disconnect between the forms of rap and the content of sound doctrine but are concerned about the gap between the supremacy of God and beer):
or the contemporary music to which the Baylys are partial. (The tag, “race,” is a nice touch.)
Old Life 
I’m not aware of anything theologically questionable in Lecrae’s rapping. In fact, as a person who has worked at a “Jesus-n-Me” store in the predominately African-American part of town, I actually rejoice whenever someone comes in and buys a CD of his because the alternative is Juanita Bynum’s drivel. Lecrae has a grip on the doctrines of grace and he’s making inroads with his music that wouldn’t otherwise be there, since many of the customers I serve couldn’t tell you ANYTHING at all about the biblical gospel. So don’t be too quick to dismiss rap as a wonderful way (if the words are sound, of course) to evangelize the churched yet unconverted. They sure as heck aren’t getting the Gospel in their pulpits.
Additionally…the Third Eagle is a fringe crazy…just like Harold Camping.
LikeLike
Heh
“don’t seem to be worried about the disconnect between the forms of rap and the content of sound doctrine”
I don’t think, as David’s comment shows, they can even perceive it.
LikeLike
Joel, I don’t doubt at all that you’re that much smarter than me (and David). But I get it. The message and the medium are vitally connected. And yet I’m not sure how someone can seriously compare the two videos.
LikeLike
As a confessional Presbyterian I don’t understand the disconnect between the forms of rap and the content of sound doctrine that you say exists. I do have a cultural bias because I grew up in the hip hop culture and I like the music produced by calvinistic artists such as Lecrae and Shai Linne. In a Christian music world full of pathetic content, Lecrae and others music is refreshing. I wonder if your personal bias against rap is based off of a lack of information. Or maybe I am wrong. Can you please inform me on your views, that way if I am wrong I can repent.
LikeLike
Ah yes, the ever present claim that the form of rap is somehow contrary to the content of the sound doctrine. If only Jesus had Mozart and Beethoven, then and only then would he have been able to marry the package and the content in the way high society can today. What a shame!
LikeLike
David, do you think that the promotion of self that characterizes modern pop music, whether white or black, rock or rap, is fitting sound doctrine? Are the forms of social protest and the exaltation of sex and drugs really the best musical idioms to use to communicate sound doctrine or praise to God? The alternative is not symphonic music. It is music that comes from Christian people in the way that folk music comes from people rooted in places and cultures. In which case, blue grass might be better than rap or classical.
LikeLike
Is there a difference though in enjoying Christian rock or rap privately during the week and using it on the Sabbath for public worship as per the RP? Or are the forms so corrupt that they shouldn’t be used at all? That seems extra biblical to me….but I stand to be corrected.
I haven’t surveyed the Christian music scene in many years but the only artist I still listen to is Rich Mullins. Amy Grant and DC Talk just didn’t stand the test of time – yikes.
LikeLike
Darryl,
Your criticisms apply only to the cultural trappings that generally accompany rap in our society, not to the art form itself. The art form in itself is quite well suited to the proclamation of truth and the gospel. Rap is at its best, in my opinion, when it is evoking emotions like a poignant sadness or repentance or righteous anger, not at people but at unjust situations or one’s own character flaws — and suggesting a way to remedy the states of affairs which cause these emotions. It is perfect for presenting tragic situations. So rap is perfectly suited to presenting the gospel! At powerfully pointing out sin and futility, the groaning of creation, and presenting as a remedy the hope that Christ brings. Lecrae has a couple of songs which utilize rap in these ways, and the result is powerful:
“Take Me As I Am” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po3k6sPHeX0 — Would that I could preach like this! I dare you to listen to this song, read through the words as he sings them, and not come away inspired and humbled by the presentation of the gospel of the Living God!
“Praying For You” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCdSWc6BBTQ — What a powerful song.
“Desperate” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUL7EEzAKQ — Who among us have not, with Paul in Romans 7, had this experience?
Moreover, rap is well suited to apologetics, criticism, and satire, because of the sheer amount of lyrics that are possible — Lecrae also has a song, “Truth,” utilizing rap in this way: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDHxnd6VFWs. As a Reformed apologist myself, I appreciate Lecrae as a fellow-laborer.
As for your argument against rap, you point out merely that rap originated in a context, and from people, who were enemies of God and who used this art form, even created this art form, in order to express that enmity. Have you forgotten about common grace? Among the enemies of God there is much evil, but there is much that is good and beautiful as well. Christians have long appropriated the good from fallen humanity while stripping it of those elements which oppose God — to do otherwise is to deny the image of God in fallen humanity. Some things are unsalvageable, but some aren’t, and I suggest Lecrae’s example has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that rap is salvageable. Lecrae and others have stripped from rap those elements that you mentioned — illegitimate social protest, sex, and drugs — and in fact have replaced them (respectively) with a thoroughly Christian critique of society’s idolatry and American culture’s obsession with sex and drugs. The promotion of self you refer to is precisely what Lecrae is attacking (see his song “Truth” above, as well as his song “Background”), and he does so using precisely that art form that has been used to promote that self-deification! I find the irony powerful; it adds to the effectiveness of Lecrae’s critique.
Do you have a specific example of something in Lecrae’s music that is left over from the secular rap culture and which is intrinsically hostile to God, something which Lecrae could remove from his music in the future? If so, point it out; that would actually be a helpful thing to do, and might help him do a better job. Unless you have something helpful of this sort to say, perhaps you should refrain from publicly criticizing a brother in Christ (or the group of which he is a part, the Gospel Coalition) who is struggling to bring the gospel to people that the rest of us have done a very poor job of reaching.
LikeLike
Bluegrass? As they sing about moonshine & women? And methinks they were planning on get drunk with said moonshine. Kinda makes the whole rap/drugs/sex point ring hallow. I thought the Heidelberg rap was silly, and I don’t personally like the whole “reformed-rap” thing, but I see some inconsistency here with your answer Dr. Hart.
LikeLike
One note: I just listened to “Desperate” again, and it is really much more inspired by Psalm 51 than by Romans 7, though it contains references to (even quotes of) both sections of Scripture.
LikeLike
Kate, I do believe there is a difference in enjoying different types of Christian music in private and in church. I don’t believe Christian rock or rap is appropriate for cooperate worship, mostly because tone and tempo are very important. While I attend a PCA church in Phoenix, our church primarily sings hymns, I believe the singing of the word of God with its inspired psalms should be the foundation of our worship. Specific instrumental musical compositions that are a staple in rap and rock just don’t mix with the singing of the word. We haven’t even talked about whether the church should even be using instruments in the first place, too that I am not informed enough on.
Dr. Hart, thank your for the clarification. I still find myself confused on the matter, because I don’t see how the medium or form itself can be held as the root of the problem. I do agree much of rock and rap is very self-promoting, but is it the style of music or is it the sinner who stands behind the microphone? Is the music idolatrous or is it the idolater who created the music? You can find self promotion and sin in anything that man creates, because man is sinful? Isn’t music itself a form of communication? I believe so, if I am wrong please set me straight. I think the real question should be what is being communicated and is it in line with scripture. I don’t want to go to an extreme, but the Greeks themselves were a cultural mess, paganism with all its sexual deviancy was rampant. Should the bible not have been communicated in their language? Should a Christian not speak of sound doctrine and its truths in the dialect of his culture, because its associated with sins?
I truly am struggling to see where to stand on this issue. I can not honestly say my responses and questions are not with out my presuppositions. What implications does 2k theology bring to music and art?
LikeLike
Dan, I don’t know anything about Lecrae’s music. Just find it odd that the blogs that promote Piper, who is worried about the disconnect between the majesty of God and an evening beer are also promoting rap.
I don’t understand your argument. First, you make it seem as if rap is a form of music or expression, on a shelf somewhere, and along comes an artist and chooses it. So in itself it is not wrong. But then you say rap originated in a context, and a not so wholesome one.
So if it didn’t come to humans pristine, like a Platonic ideal, but it came from an unsavory context, do we just ignore context? And can we ignore the context when the form was designed to accomplish an end that was fundamentally counter to the sorts of virtues that Paul says in Titus 2 are fitting sound doctrine — modesty, self-restraint, subjection to others?
LikeLike
DJ, the point about bluegrass is a cultural form that is neither pop/commercial or symphonic courtly. Have you listened to so much rap that you don’t about kinds of cultural expression?
LikeLike
Derrick, I think the associations of some cultural expressions makes them less than ideal and so unprofitable for expressing Christian virtues and truths. That doesn’t mean I think Christians may not use or experience them in his or her secular calling. But to try to use something like Curb Your Enthusiasm as a Christian vehicle is simply dumbfounding. Why not let Larry David have his fun and let Christians sing their psalms?
LikeLike
Don’t forget current cultural context. Rap means something quite different today than it did in the days of Grandmaster Flash.
Likewise, it’s likely that if David sang his psalms in church today, we are so far removed from his musical sensibilities that we would be unable to worship to it (even though, in an ideal world, we should).
LikeLike
Good words Dr. Hart, thank you. I agree that some cultural expression are unprofitable for expressing Christian virtues and truths. The problem I see in Christian rap is the idea that the music itself is ministry and that the gospel must be contextualized for people of a specific culture to understand it. So in comes rap music as a form of evangelism, which I fully disagree with. The reason you see John Piper and others so heavily embrace this new “reformed” rap is because they reject the Reformed understanding of word and sacrament ministry. In their circles contextualization has replaced the means of grace.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
My point is that the sinful context out of which rap originated is not essential to rap as an art form and does not necessarily accompany rap in all its uses. We can make similar points about Greek architecture and Greek philosophy — we should not use these tools in the way that the Greeks did, but they can be appropriated. So obviously I disagree that rap is in itself aimed at an end incompatible with the gospel, whatever its original creators used it for. You can persuade me otherwise: all you have to do is identify a quality which is essential to rap as an art form (such that it wouldn’t be rap without that quality) and say why that quality is inherently opposed to Christianity. Is it the beat or the rhythm? The tendency to speak rather than sing? The rhyming? What characteristic of rap is such that it is essentially opposed to the content of the gospel and necessarily produces tension when used to express the gospel? The burden of argument is on you; you are the one arguing against an entire art form. Vague references to “context” just doesn’t meet that burden. All of the characteristics of rap you identified — worship of self, inappropriate social protest, glorification of sex and drugs — are obviously not essential to rap, because Lecrae produces songs which are quite obviously rap and which do not share those characteristics.
We can also quibble about the origin of rap, though that is not essential to my argument. David Alexander told me that he thought rap originated in order to express a minority’s experience of oppression — something that would be very well suited to expressing important episodes in the history of redemption and contemporary Christian experience. Rap obviously took a different turn in the 90s. Now, I don’t know much about the genesis of rap, so I can’t vouch for that.
(My previous comment still says that it is “awaiting moderation;” can the others on the blog see that comment?)
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, did you listen to the first song of Lecrae’s that I linked, “Take Me As I Am”? I’m interested to hear what you thought of it.
LikeLike
Hi Dr. Hart,
I am not sure I am understanding your reasons for dismissing rap (or better, hip-hop).
Hart: David, do you think that the promotion of self that characterizes modern pop music, whether white or black, rock or rap, is fitting sound doctrine?
Me: Of course not. But your original post made it seem as though the very form of rap was somehow in tension with sound doctrine. But of course the very form of rap has nothing essentially to do with the promotion of self. Perhaps it originated that way (I think the origins of rap are complex and interesting. Dan above notes that I said it originated to express various groups experience of oppression. That is definitely part of the story but there is more to the story than that and self-promotion is part of it) but do you think that all things having wicked origins should be rejected? Surely not. So why rap?
Hart: Are the forms of social protest and the exaltation of sex and drugs really the best musical idioms to use to communicate sound doctrine or praise to God?
Me: Of course not. But again why think that rap is somehow defined in these terms? I honestly do not get it. Is rock n roll similarly to be rejected for having similar origins? How about Volkswagen and its association with the Nazi party? Is not part of the point of Christian rappers (and lots of non-Christian rappers as well) to demonstrate that the art form can be redeemed?
Hart: The alternative is not symphonic music. It is music that comes from Christian people in the way that folk music comes from people rooted in places and cultures. In which case, blue grass might be better than rap or classical.
Me: But why can’t we say the same thing about what various Christian artists are trying to do with rap? That is we have Christian people rooted in places and cultures that have long had something like rap as part of their history and these peoples are demonstrating that it can be used for the glory of God.
Incidentally, readers should check out the following video (it is not appropriate for younger viewers):
I recently used it in a course I taught that covered the seven deadly sins (or the seven capital vices). It’s a powerful video about lust.
LikeLike
Jeff, and who has argued for chanting the psalms?
LikeLike
Derrick, I’d put the problem with Piper this way: he doesn’t think about cultural forms enough — the way someone like Ken Myers does — in order to see that cultural expression is a reflection of the way we understand the light of nature. In which case, since the Bible says little about aesthetics, and the words are sound, we can do anything that embodies good thought. But some cultural forms go better with certain words than others.
LikeLike
Everyone here concedes that rap and rock originate from unwholesome circumstances that do not reveal the best of human nature. A comparison is made to Greek architecture. If Greek architecture exalts the self, then it is also likely unfitting for Christian use. There are modest forms of the forms of Greek architecture. But to say that the Greeks were bad and we use them, so why not rap is not much of an argument.
One example comes to mind that illustrates the point I am trying to make. Sing the words of Amazing Grace to the Mickey Mouse tune. It loses something. I’d argue the same thing about contemporary Christian music.
Aesthetically, I find rap to be as objectionable as the tunes of Fanny Crosby hymns. That does not mean that we should we should only listen to excellent or superior music. But I am not sure why we should try to justify inferior forms of cultural expression to convey Christian truth.
LikeLike
You know, if you have enough vision and give it a few seconds, Larry Dvid and John Piper have a resemblance. Maybe the way “Curb Your Enthusiasm” is the dark Seinfeld, Desiring God Ministries could reclaim humor with “Magnify Your Enthusiasm.”
LikeLike
My wife has a pretty good way of making the point about form and content: she sings “Like a Virgin” in operatic. For those yet unconvinced, try it and it might come home.
LikeLike
Zrim,
Next time I’m in Grand Rapids, let’s work on a pilot.
LikeLike
Zrim,
David and I certainly agree that there is an important relationship between form and content. And it may be that certain kinds of sinful content need the art form of rap for effective expression — it is harder to celebrate sex and drugs with classical music than with rap, thought Mozart probably found a way in some of his productions. We simply deny that the form of rap necessarily and only fits together with sinful content. As a form, it is also very well suited to evoking appropriate emotions of poignant sadness and other powerful (and righteous) emotions directed at the dark things in life. That makes it well suited, as a form, to the expression of the gospel. It is also well suited to apologetics, as I mentioned above.
Listen to Lecrae’s song “Take Me As I Am” that I linked above and the song David linked above that brings home the awfulness of the sex industry (there is no opportunity for temptation in the video, for those worried about that). I defy you to compare those songs to “Like A Virgin” sung in operatic style or “Amazing Grace” sung to the Mickey Mouse tune.
Dr. Hart, you say you find rap to be aesthetically inferior. But you haven’t answered my question: did you listen to “Take Me As I Am”? Do you find that song “aesthetically inferior?”
LikeLike
Dan, if it helps, my own view here is that while I might be of the form-content outlook that differs from you, I also think that what might be called culturally superior forms don’t really solve the problem.
Not to highjack DGH’s post, but speaking of links, I explain here why I don’t think the traditionalists are of any help:
http://confessionalouthouse.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/why-the-traditionalists-are-of-no-help-willow-creek-for-the-raised-pinky-class/
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
I am not sure why we should think that rap is an “inferior form of cultural expression” to other forms of popular or classical music or poetry. It is important to be careful not to denigrate a form of cultural expression as inferior simply because we do not sufficiently understand or appreciate the experiences of the members of that culture. I suspect that many white American slave owners initially perceived black spirituals as inferior forms of cultural expression simply because they saw the culture out of which such spirituals arose as an inferior culture to their own. We must be careful not make the same mistake (I offer this as a warning to myself as much as anyone else in this conversation). While there are certainly many aspects of the culture of which rap is a main form of expression that are antithetical to Christianity, this is true of all forms of modern music (I went to a prominent Christian college that not long ago had a big battle over whether to allow a purely instrumental jazz band in the music department) and I think David is right that story of rap’s origin is complex. Moreover, while rap might not exemplify the majesty or beauty of the best classical music (remember, much bad classical music was and is composed – we just rarely hear anything but the best of the genre), rap at its best exhibits great poetic and rhetorical talent and it is not at all obvious, as others have pointed out, that rap is unduly suited for Christian expression.
That said, I think it is worth noting that rap, as all other musical art forms, is both valuable and dangerous because of their power to evoke (and express) emotions. Songwriters (used broadly to include rappers, or at least those who write their own lyrics) are the poets of our day (who reads real poems anymore?…besides Oprah that is). They are capable of not only evoking emotions from their audiences, but also helping their audiences to express emotions they already feel and direct those emotions at various objects. Since the virtues and vices are character traits that essentially involve emotion-dispositions, such emotional habituation through music and poetry (as well as movies and literature) can aid in the develop of virtue, but it can also aid in the development of vice.
The problem with much of rap and hip hop is that the emotions evoked/expressed are either sinful in and of themselves (e.g., pride, hatred, unrighteous anger, envy, etc.) or they are directed at the wrong objects. Emotions can be evoked and expressed both through lyrics that depict value-laden situations and through the music (beat, tune) itself. Rap thus goes bad when the songs depict situations that ought to evoke certain (moral) emotions (e.g., indignation, contrition, compassion, etc.), while the beat and the tone of the song and, thanks to MTV, the music video, evoke contrary emotions. This is the standard problem of desensitization and is particularly harmful when songs such as those that demean women (e.g., much of the rap of Easy E and Too Short in the eighties and nineties and Ludacris in the last decade), or promote sexual infidelity, or encourage violence and drug abuse (e.g., M.I.A.’s recent “Paper Planes” and Trey Songz’ “Bottoms Up” just to name a couple that come to mind), are played heavily on the radio and downloaded from iTunes by teenagers and pre-teens who then learn to view these value-laden situations without the appropriate emotional responses and often with wildly inappropriate emotional responses. As Plato might put it, they learn to take pleasure and pain in the wrong things (and not take pleasure and pain in the right things).
In fact, most young people in our culture have been trained to think so little about the lyrics of the songs they listen to all day long on the radio and on their iPods that it is now difficult for songwriters/rappers to communicate any serious message, no matter how careful they are about matching up the music with the lyrics. Here I think of Eminem’s recent hit song “Love the Way You Lie” featuring Rhianna. Eminem describes a desperate situation about the character in the song (presumably a hyperbolic version of himself) being fully unable to control his sinful and violent nature even toward a woman with whom he is “in love”. The song ends with the character trying to apologize for being abusive but acknowledging that his apology is meaningless since he is powerless to avoid being abusive again, so he finishes with a threat (or maybe just a morbid prediction) that next time his lover tries to leave he will “tie her to the bed and set the house on fire.” When I played this for a college ethics class, the entire class sang along with the chorus as if it was a “fun” song, despite the fact that they knew it was about physical and verbal abuse. Apparently, our class discussion was the first time many of them had actually thought about just how dark and despairing the song actually is. Incidentally, I used the song to depict the problem C.S. Lewis identifies in The Four Loves that occurs when people make Eros their god, thinking it the highest form of love – since it is not the highest kind of love and it is particularly fleeting, people who deify it often end up dissatisfied, frustrated, and angry and then take that anger and frustration out on the one they purported to love so much. While Eminem’s song ends on the despairing note that he knows no way to save himself from his condition, Lewis argues that having divinely-bestowed charity toward those we are “in love” with is the only way to be saved from this predicament – we must, by God’s grace, learn to treat them with love and respect as the valuable creatures of God they are even when our feelings of being “in love” go away. I doubt that any other form of musical/poetic expression is better suited than rap to communicate to American youth this deep problem of human enslavement to sin and our need for redemption.
The moral is that rap done well (as any poetry, art, etc.) will evoke/express emotions in the right way toward the right objects. Secular rap can (and sometimes does) accomplish this task, as do songwriters representing other popular musical styles (I have also used John Mayer and U2 in my teaching to good effect). One need not, then, be explicitly Christian to do Christian rap well – one must simply rap well from a Christian moral and theological outlook. Of course, explicit presentations of the gospel and other theological themes are not bad (though using rap to promote bad theology or bad rap to promote good theology is obviously also to be discouraged).
LikeLike
Derrick,
Do you think that it is appropriate to use any form of music to evangelize? If so, why not this particular form? If not, why not? I actually do not have a horse in that race.
However, it may be a mistake to think of Christian rap in such a narrow way. Sure some of it may have the explicit intent to bring people to Christ, and some of that may be goofy or worse. But some of it is simply done to praise God, or to depict various evils, or to show the meaningless of life (or some particular aspect of life) apart from God. Now each of these may have some evangelistic upshot but evangelism may not be the direct intent and it seems to me a mistake to paint rap with so narrow a brush.
LikeLike
The 2k implications for music appear to be that there is no Christian music apart from that sung in corporate worship, but Christians are responsible for determining a sensible use of music outside of the church, which in turn depends on their intent, aesthetics, and sense of humor. I never had any use for Limp Bizkit until Richard Cheese came along, though he would still offend the dry parachurchers. (He’s also a skilled illustrator of the form/content relationship.)
While confessional rap is possible in a literal sense, in execution it differs little from a rap elegy. How much it affects you might depend on whether you cried when you heard Biggie got shot.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
I am a bit disheartened that the Christian hip-hop (aka holy hip-hop) movement is being discredited on the basis of inherent inferiority. This was actually the basis of a talk given by Thabiti Anyabwile at the T4G (Together for the Gospel) Conference in 2008 on “Bearing the Image.” The thrust of the Thabiti’s talk was that the gospel needs to remain the gospel in its entirety across culture. If things are added or subtracted from it, the gospel is lost. If we believe that certain people are inferior (say, that a black man is really 3/5 of a man) and thus not deserving of our liberty in the way Paul meant it in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, then we have in a real way added something to the gospel. The offer of the gospel is no longer for those made in the image of God, but for those who are in His image and who meet this or that criteria. For me to believe that hip-hop culture is inherently inferior, that rap is real but only capable of being 3/5 of a musical genre, would give me little incentive to redeem hip-hop culture or its music. Even if redeemed, rap (inherently 3/5 of musical genre) would forever remain sub-par to Handel (being a natural 5/5). This hip-hop culture would certainly still be in need of the gospel, but there’s no real place for their culture or their art in Christianity.
Of course, I say that in its context. The lyrics of Lecrae, Handel, and those found in the psalms would all be butchered if sung to the Mickey Mouse tune. Each was written for a purpose and use in a particular genre. But just because the genres in which Handel and the psalms have traditionally been sung are more in line with a worship service (rhythm and tempo appropriate for choral singing, etc.), that does not mean that Lecrae is unable to make excellent art through the medium of rap. I think it’s been established by many in this post that the art form itself is not lost or inherently less useful for Christians (it could indeed be argued the opposite way as Dan has suggested). Thabiti has noted elsewhere that the holy hip-hop movement has become one of the primary teaching tools of doctrine for the churched and unchurched, alike, in African-American culture. It has not replaced teaching in the church, but has become a primary source. In a way that Fanny Crosby (and many contemporary artists) have not done, the music of Lecrae, Trip Lee, and others have communicated gospel truth about man and God, calling for a conviction of sin and repentance, and for the hope in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. These recurring themes are perhaps more easily communicated through the genre’s intensely lyrical style than the pop style of all contemporary worship music or even hymnody. You’d think that a tradition based on the Word and communication of a piece of news would welcome a genre of music that has a 300% increase in total word volume. I would add to the links above a song from Trip Lee preaching through the entire book of Philippians chapter by chapter in 5 minutes seen here, and a newer release from Lecrae that focuses on God’s sovereignty and even makes reference to William Henley’s Invictus.
Dr. Hart, I’m primarily disheartened because I have seen and felt the good that the holy hip-hop movement has been doing in bringing about conviction and building faith in my own life and, I pray, will keep doing for God’s kingdom. I think this movement is an encouraging testimony to the Spirit’s power in the redemption of art and culture.
LikeLike
Oops… the links were connected in the Word file:
1. Thabiti Anyabwile talk at T4G ’08 http://www.ligonier.org/learn/conferences/together_for_the_gospel_2008/bearing-the-image-identity-the-work-of-christ-and/
2. Trip Lee, “To Live is Christ”
3. Lecrae, “Background”
LikeLike
Steve, as a new guy to this forum, what did you mean by stating that if “rap is real but only capable of being 3/5 of a musical genre, [this fact] would give me little incentive to redeem hip-hop culture”? Other comments that were equally confusing, for me, were “Even if redeemed, rap (inherently 3/5 of musical genre) would forever remain sub-par to Handel (being a natural 5/5). This hip-hop culture would certainly still be in need of the gospel, but there’s no real place for their culture or their art in Christianity” and “I think this movement is an encouraging testimony to the Spirit’s power in the redemption of art and culture.”
Steve, how does one go about preaching the gospel to hip-hop culture? I know Tim Keller makes a lot of sense to some people out there, but his transformationalism is logically lost on me before it is biblically lost on me. I may not be able to provide you with an incentive to redeem rap culture, but I can provide a list of reasons to attend church. Also, in whatever sense you believe hip-hop is “bringing about conviction and building faith,” I can assure you that church will do so much more.
Even if I thought that one could redeem arts and crafts, why would I want the arts and crafts’ products made by people who may remain unregenerate, despite their culture’s redemption. In all honesty, if entertainment culture gets redeemed, does that mean I have to make room for Larry Flynt or his contribution to picture-books in Christianity? If you get the culture, you get the people, I guess. In this way, Neo-kuyperian theology, with all of its consequences, is like a (better?) form of evangelism? I don’t know! I am just trying to make some sense of this (and your) type of thinking.
I know that there are biblical grounds for discussion, but I assumed that because you didn’t provide any Scriptural support for you conclusions you weren’t really trying to make a biblical case for redeeming hip-hop subculture. I just get so confused with the rhetoric you used about preaching the gospel at various arts and crafts. Also, when do you know it has been successfully redeemed? Or, when do you know to move on to the next art project? I mean with Keller spearheading this campaign for renewing Manhattan, you think it would redeemed by now. I mean a nonChristian I’ll continue to preach to, but i have limits with cities (20? 30 years?). Maybe a sector of the city, a sub-district, a block, a house, a room in a house? He must have a few rooms by now with some hip-hop albums in them!
I am sorry, in advance, for spelling errors. I am typing from an iPhone because I didn’t want to wake my wife (or the dog, who has taken all of the blanket!) by going to a computer.
LikeLike
Steve Johnson, should I be disheartened about the way you feel about Mickey Mouse? We all think some forms of cultural expression are superior to others. If not, it we are cultural egalitarians, then what is really wrong with multi-culturalism or the politics of identity. For what it’s worth, I actually think we see signs of multi-culturalism affecting evangelicalism in defenses of rap and hip-hop. If it helps, I feel the same way about Leave it To Beaver, which is inferior to Shakespeare’s As You Like It. The question is what is the basis for judging culture? If you read books like Alan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind or Ken Myer’s All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes, you might actually find standards that are different from the admittedly egalitarian nature of being adopted in Christ. As I see it, though, my standing before God is very different, at least for now, from my standing before other men and our cultural forms.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, I would like to see you explain more about why rap music is an inherently inferior form of music. If your position is that it is an art form currently associated with very wicked aspects of culture and should be avoided because of its bad associations, I understand and I think I may agree. But I think what you are saying goes beyond that and I’m interested in your reasoning since I’m assuming it has a biblical and not just a cultural grounding.
Please don’t wonder if this is a “trick question.” I’m serious and I’d like to hear your biblical evaluation of rap music.
Here’s why I’m asking. I’m speaking as someone who during seminary worked in an inner-city congregation and was a small part of helping it make the transition from being predominantly white to becoming a predominantly African-American congregation. I’m not trying to claim credit — the hard work of leadership was done by others and I was mostly listening, learning, and doing what I was asked to do rather than setting policy.
From that experience, I became painfully aware of the problems of modern African-American church culture — not so much problems in the church where I was working but rather problems experienced by people who were leaving other churches to join ours. Those included an emphasis on emotion rather than discipleship, preaching which focused on volume rather than biblical content, and a lack of male leadership apart from the pastor. Those factors, especially a lack of discipleship and a lack of male elders who can model Christian life for young men in the church, can easily lead to a serious disconnect in the personal life of the members even in African American churches which do have fairly biblical preaching and teaching.
(And yes, I’m aware those are all problems of modern white evangelicalism, and are becoming worse as the destructive influence of the charismatic movement continues to grow, sometimes bringing charismatic worship and an emphasis on emotion rather than content into churches which would never allow tonguespeaking. This is less of an attack on the African-American church than an attack on the charismatic movement and its consequences.)
“Christian Rap” can very easily play into all of those problems.
On the other hand, one major attraction of the Black Muslim movement is that it emphasizes male leadership and personal discipline. Twenty years ago, long before most Americans knew much of anything about Islam, I was struck, when hearing young African American women tell me what they respected about Dutch Christian Reformed men and Black Muslims, how similar their evaluation was of both religious communities. A consistent theme was that white Hollanders and black Muslims both trained their young men to treat women with respect and to “walk their talk.” There are other cultural similarities between the legalism of the Dutch and Muslim communities, but these women were trying to be complimentary, not critical, with their comments, and I don’t think they understood the Dutch well enough to see the bad side of that community.
One good part of trying to plant a Refomed church in an inner-city context is that most inner-city communities have at least one church which is known as “the quiet church” which is quite openly anti-pentecostal. It often attracts African-American members who are sick and tired of emotionalism and lack of biblical content. White people should not automatically assume that we need to use pentecostal and charismatic worship to reach a predominantly African-American community.
I need to close with this — I know that as a white person, I simply do not have the credibility to say things that are better said by those raised in that environment who can critique it from firsthand experience and will not attract accusations of racism. For those who read this and think my post as racist, note that I’m very critical of problems in white evangelical churches as well. The problem is not race but rather bad theology that leads to major problems in the church.
LikeLike
If we’re going to critique Lecrae’s rap music, understanding his rationale behind the music is probably going to be helpful.
Here is a three-part video by Lecrae on how he was raised and why he does what he does in his music.
http://battle4truth.wordpress.com/2008/05/06/reformed-rapper-lecrae-interview/
Much of what he says sounds very much like what I was used to seeing in inner-city church work, especially the lack of solid male leadership, the presence of lots of poverty and physical abuse, a lack of stable homes, and the presence of a praying grandmother who had lots of emphasis on Jesus without a lot of content.
Lecrae says he was attracted to men who looked like him, talked like him,and dressed like him but who didn’t hurt and abuse him out of a “macho man” approach to teaching kids to be tough — people he later learned were Christians and were very different from what he saw from the more typical men in his life. I realize those can be “code words” for “not acting white,” but I don’t want to assume that attitude is present in Lecrae because I don’t know enough about him. It’s also quite possible that he doesn’t have those views but is trying to reach people who do.
What is clear in Lecrae’s video is that he believes the way to reach the gang-infested inner-city culture is to speak to its people using the form of music they’re used to, while putting very different content into that music.
I don’t know enough about Lecrae to have an opinion about his music, but it is helpful to hear in his own words what he is trying to do with his music.
LikeLike
Sorry to add one more post. Dr. Hart, would you agree with the sentiments of this article criticizing the forms of worship of much of the “new Calvinism?”
http://www.metropolitantabernacle.org/Sword-And-Trowel/Sword-and-Trowel-Articles/The-Merger-of-Calvinism-with-Worldliness
LikeLike
Steve, I’m as confused about some of your comments as Ryan. First, you seem to suggest that to regard some cultural musical forms as inferior is more or less equivalent to regarding individuals as humanly inferior. That is, to say that hip-hop is 3/5s is to say its adherents are 3/5s. That’s a dubious claim in and of itself. But then you go on to say,
For me to believe that hip-hop culture is inherently inferior, that rap is real but only capable of being 3/5 of a musical genre, would give me little incentive to redeem hip-hop culture or its music. Even if redeemed, rap (inherently 3/5 of musical genre) would forever remain sub-par to Handel (being a natural 5/5). This hip-hop culture would certainly still be in need of the gospel, but there’s no real place for their culture or their art in Christianity.
This seems to suggest that there is something inherently wrong with hip-hop such that it stands in need of being redeemed. So which is it? Is hip-hop intrinsically 3/5s or not? And if it is then why are you dinging those who are also saying that to the point of suggesting something ignoble in their views about human beings? Not only that, you seem to suggest that Handel’s being 5/5s needs no redeeming, which seems to suggest that higher order temporal forms are coterminous with being eternal, which further suggests a real confusion about the temporal and eternal.
But for my part, first, I don’t see what’s so wrong with distinguishing a cultural valuation such that we can say there are inferior and superior forms. It doesn’t mean we should avoid lower forms; I partake of lower forms of culture regularly and see no need whatsoever to “redeem†it because lower forms, like higher forms, are just fine as-is. And second, if it helps, I tend to see as much of a problem with higher temporal forms embodying eternal content as lower forms. If the choice is between higher and lower, I do think higher wins, but I don’t know that we have to make that choice. It may be that rejecting both the form and content of both hip-hop and Handel in favor of no instruments and sola scriptura to embody and give voice to our prayers and praises is the way to go?
LikeLike
Zrim,
I don’t think you read Steve’s post very carefully. He certainly and obviously never said that regarding cultural forms as inherently inferior is equivalent to regarding individuals as humanly inferior; he was merely claiming that the two are analogous in some way (and, I believe, crediting that analogy to Thabiti, not himself). Now, you could disagree that there is an analogy; perhaps bringing that up would take us somewhere productive.
The passage you quoted is mostly “in voice” as the position that Steven is criticizing. (It can be hard to interpret “in voice” writing, so I sympathize; nearly Van Til’s entire introduction to Warfield’s “On The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible” is in voice, and hard to understand.) He himself doesn’t think that there is something inherently wrong with rap. When he speaks of “redeeming” unbelieving culture, he is simply referring to the process I described above: taking the good while stripping it of the bad. His point is that if you thought rap inherently inferior, you wouldn’t want to redeem it because you wouldn’t think there was much if any good to take from it at all. But he insists that rap is worth redeeming, and I agree.
I do think one qualification on Steve’s post is called for: it is possible to say that some forms of music are “superior” to others (and, frankly, I don’t think Steve would disagree). However, two cautions are needed. First, just saying that one form of music is “superior” to another is too simple; we need to identify the respect(s) in which the one form is superior to the other. It may be that the overall “inferior” form is still better suited to some particular task than the “superior” form is — expressing certain kinds of thoughts and emotions in certain kinds of situations, for example. Second, Dr. Hart has consistently refused to give anything like a decent reason to think that rap is “inferior” to any other sort of music in any respect whatsoever, much less overall. He has made lots of unsubstantiated assertions, of course. Where’s the argument? (He has also refused to answer a question I’ve asked him twice; not sure why that is.)
LikeLike
His point is that if you thought rap inherently inferior, you wouldn’t want to redeem it because you wouldn’t think there was much if any good to take from it at all. But he insists that rap is worth redeeming, and I agree.
Dan, so if I follow, you (both) are saying that hip-hop needs redeeming. I think M*A*S*H is lower order compared to Saving Private Ryan. But I still don’t see why sitcom TV needs redeeming. You seem to be working with a premise I don’t share, namely that creation needs a redemptive version. M*A*S*H is just fine as-is, and not just because it was arguably the best writing commerical television ever knew. And so is hip-hop. Try a thought experiment: a Christian version of M*A*S*H. Now that’s funny, but not in a good way.
Wait, M*A*s*H did have a Christian representation: Frank Burns. Now that was funny in a good way.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
You bring up a really great point when you ask, “should I be disheartened about the way you feel about Mickey Mouse?” I think it’s important to say that I do not believe that children’s music (broadened from Mickey Mouse) is an automatically inferior genre. It would be butchery to have the Hallelujah chorus or Lecrae’s “Truth” be sung to that tune, but primarily because they are meant for a very different style an form. Now the Mickey Mouse tune with its own lyrics may not be well-made in respect to its genre (its forms may not be excellent), it may exalt the Mickey mouse club to an unhealthy level (“Forever let us hold our banner High!”), and it’s essential worldview of fun could be overwhelming to my son and dominate the worldview I would be teaching him about God. Children’s music is a genre that I would not consider singing in church and would not be necessary for me as an adult moving beyond spiritual milk to more substantial food. But that does not mean that Judy Rogers’ children CD Teach Me While My Heart Is Tender, which is a creative recapitulation of the Westminster Shorter Catechism and which is well-made in form, is an inferior art form. It has fulfilled its purpose for my 3-year-old quite excellently in form and worldview. What in rap makes its forms inferior? C. S. Lewis once noted that it may be better for Christianity that a Christian should write a well-made and excellent science book than to write a theology book where the work has been done in an excellent way already. Richard Niebuhr put forth famously that Christ is the “transformer of Culture” (he is not against, of, above, or in paradox with it). D. A. Carson similarly rejects, in his revisiting of Niebuhr’s book, the concept of “high vs. low” culture, quoting Clifford Geertz, “The culture concept… denotes a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodies in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic form by means in which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes towards life.”
I’ll be very honest at this point. I’m a young guy of 23 that really has no philosophical or pastoral training. I have much to learn from you, Dr. Hart, and I want to revere a Godly mentor. But the evidence I have seen in God’s Word (with respect to redeeming the city: Jeremiah 29:7, Proverbs 11:10-11, Acts 10:34-35, Matthew 11:12, Colossians 1:18; 3:23; in regard to using and redeeming music joyfully, originally, and with our intellect: Psalm 150, Psalm 67:4, Psalm 96:1, 1 Corinthians 14:15) is surely enough to compel me towards redeeming a genre of music (or encourage those who are capable of it!) and ALL forms of art that can be used to praise God’s name. During an OPC men’s breakfast meeting here in Oregon where we were discussing ministry opportunities for 2011, I saw an emphasis on the preached to Word become an argument for “other churches will do these ministries far better than we can,” which eventually became “how do we know that God wants to save those people, anyway?” This obviously wasn’t a well-articulated connection, but I do fear that the OPC’s emphasis on anti-worldliness and anti-contextualization (different things which are being made the same thing, I believe) is but a small step away from hyper-Calvinism and a rejection of the gospel to all men in God’s image. Again, I can’t do justice to the whole of this particular evaluation of African American culture and the gospel, but Thabiti’s lecture that I linked to above was extremely helpful for me.
Zrim and Ryan, I can understand some of the confusion each of you had. Let me do my best to briefly clarify (thanks, Dan, for assisting in that effort). What I meant in that first paragraph by “rap is real but only capable of being 3/5 of a musical genre, [this fact] would give me little incentive to redeem hip-hop culture” is that IF I think of rap as a lesser art form, still acceptable to listen to but not worthy of promotion within Christianity, then I shouldn’t want to encourage Lecrae or Trip Lee in their efforts in redeeming that genre of music. However, I don’t personally believe of rap music as inherently lesser in form (it can be equally as excellent for its own uses) and so I believe the progress the holy hip-hop movement has seen “is an encouraging testimony to the Spirit’s power in the redemption of art and culture.†I am similarly encouraged by the work of John Piper and Tim Keller. Just because Tim Keller hasn’t redeemed all of New York doesn’t mean that he should abandon his work there. Just because Geneva had faults, Scotland had its illiteracy, and Holland was rampant with sin, doesn’t mean that our reformation fathers should have avoided transforming those cultures. And I think I can rightly say that just because Jesus wasn’t able to successfully redeem all high culture or the slums of the Middle East in his 3 years of ministry doesn’t mean that his efforts to sit and speak to tax collectors or prostitutes in a relevant (i.e. contextualized) way was in vain. I also believe that the holy hip hop movement is doing much to bring people into the church. Lecrae’s “Beautiful Feet,” “The Bride,” and Trip Lee’s “To Live is Christ” are all excellent examples of this. They frequently point beyond their music to the God’s Word and to Christ’s bride.
Zrim, in regard to your last post, I would join you in not wanting an exact Christian version of M*A*S*H*. Think of the theme song (“Jesus Christ is painless, He brings on holy changes, and only he can truly justify!”). This is definitely reminiscent of “Doom and Gloom” in Dr Hart’s post — a version of the art with absolutely zero excellence in form in respect to the genre. But I think what Dan and I are trying to say is that holy hip-hop, classical, baroque, children’s music, and even the arts such as painting, sculpting, and architecture are all in need of redeeming. So as far as TV comedy goes, I think Christian writers should be encouraged to write for these shows. Just as Nicholas Wolterstorff and Alvin Plantiga have done great work in philosophy and are “redeeming” it for Christianity, so too can a Christian writer do great work (exhibit great excellence in form) in a TV comedy genre and begin to redeem it by writing well-crafted humor, removing the rampant immorality, and emphasizing plot themes with some gravitas. I think several of those involved in the holy hip-hop movement have exhibited great form and innovation relative to the rap genre and, additionally, they’ve exhibited excellence in Christian doctrine., which is why I believe the Gospel Coalition is so excited and enthused about its acceptance in broader culture. Has the holy hip-hop movement stayed true to gospel message? If not, where has it failed? Dan pointed this out earlier. In absence any specific critique of the inferiority of the forms of hip-hop, is there an improvement that can be made in the content of this movement?
LikeLike
Steve, I will not use this as the place to critique Neo-Kuyperian theology. Others have done a great job of this. One example would be Jason Stellman’s Dual Citizens. It is my opinion that the Transformationalists have included publishing companies in their lists of things in a culture to redeem, and if there has been any progress, it has been felt most there. However, I will try to contribute to this discussion.
Colossians 1:18; 3:23
18And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.
23 Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men,
Acts 10:34-35
34So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, 35but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.
Matthew 11:12
12From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force.
Proverbs 11:10-11
11The mouth of the righteous is a fountain of life,
but the mouth of the wicked conceals violence.
12Hatred stirs up strife,
but love covers all offenses.
1 Corinthians 14:15 (This one you grouped with your music category, but maybe you need a redeeming tongues category. Honest mistake, I am sure.)
14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.
Now, for guys that care so much about contextualization, you think you spend a few minutes an apply a hermeneutic like grammatico-historical (or even a framework, like Covenantal) to Jeremiah 29:7. I mean, there is no doubt that this verse is central to your system. Why would Paul or Peter, in all of their correspondences with the churches fail to include some clear teachings on city, town, or regional redemption. Why would Paul, Peter, James, John, the Gospel writers, or Jesus himself not make some reference, indirect or direct, to those passages that are taken out of Babylonian context (pun intended). All you need is a commentary to understand those verses you have provided, not even a good one for that matter. Honestly, you probably only need to do a cursory reading of the text itself. I do not understand what you or others (in the cultural renewal camp) think is going on in those texts, but I do not see anything about redeeming a city. And by what standard do you judge a city redeemed? And what cities? Why not Sodom and Gomorrah? If ever there were a good place to include such rhetoric, it would be here:
1 Timothy 2
1First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Considering this letter is a pastoral epistle, it would be a good time to tell someone who has been recently installed in Ephesus to have a ministry focus that seeks the welfare of the city or at least something about redeeming culture. Paul’s instruction to this newly installed leader in First Timothy 3 about qualifications for new elders and deacons would include some charge about the culture and redeeming it, right? Paul would charge Timothy with have elders and deacons who seek the Ephesus’s welfare, right? Yet, the charge does not discuss any of these issues that have seemed to shape the entire ministry foci of many pastors, especially those in my PCA denomination. And what of Paul leaving Titus in Crete to appoint qualified elders in every town? Why not include a discussion on how elders redeeming of the towns? Yet, he discusses how sound doctrine and good works are good for people.
Titus 3:1-8
Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. 3For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. 4But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, 6whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. 8The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.
So, Paul instructs Titus to tell people to be submissive to rulers and authorities (who are not godly) and understand how (people in a Cretan culture) are saved, by Christ’s mercy and the renewal of the Holy Spirit whom he poured out on us (not culture, structures, institutions, etc.). These are the things that profitable for people, not redeeming a bunch of hip-hop songs and musical genres. As the writer of Hebrews puts it in the eleventh chapter,
16But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.
I do not want renewed cultural forms. I want God. I don’t want as Richard L. Pratt, Jr. has stated: to drive a redeemed, better Ferrari in heaven or earth; I want to live in a place where God dwells amongst His people, who He has redeemed, not a culture.
LikeLike
Darrell, my objections to rap are like my objections to Aerosmith or Z Z Top. It doesn’t do anything for me musically. Not every form of music has to be Mozart. But how about a melody? How about a progression of chords?
I understand that rap may be an expression of a certain kind of culture that has claims of oppression and victimization. But that doesn’t make it aesthetically good.
And as far as using it for evangelism or worship, I am a means of grace guy who thinks God gave us word and sacraments and has promised to bless them. They are what we all need on the Lord’s Day. During the rest of the week we have some liberty. But that liberty does not mean all cultural expressions are equal. Like Christian brothers, some are weaker, some are stronger, depending on how well they use the light of nature.
LikeLike
Steve, I think you are raising way too many issues and placing a burden on rap that it won’t bear. Take a breath and first ask what makes rap a form of cultural expression that is beautiful. Then separate that from what the church is called to do and the means God has appointed for the church to do those tasks. The church does not need to do cultural analysis or redemption to save and shepherd God’s people.
LikeLike
What I meant in that first paragraph by “rap is real but only capable of being 3/5 of a musical genre, [this fact] would give me little incentive to redeem hip-hop culture†is that IF I think of rap as a lesser art form, still acceptable to listen to but not worthy of promotion within Christianity, then I shouldn’t want to encourage Lecrae or Trip Lee in their efforts in redeeming that genre of music. However, I don’t personally believe of rap music as inherently lesser in form (it can be equally as excellent for its own uses) and so I believe the progress the holy hip-hop movement has seen “is an encouraging testimony to the Spirit’s power in the redemption of art and culture.â€
So, Steve, what you’re saying is that you need an incentive to redeem a segment of culture (i.e. hippity-hoppity) so that it can get Christian endorsement. And what frustrates this incentive is to distinguish between lesser and higher temporal forms. This allergy against such distinctions seems to me to be a way that leaves us with no way to distinguish between comic books and novels or fast food and gourmet. That seems to me to be fairly impoverished way to experience and indulge greater creation.
But another frustration to your plight might be an older, more robust Reformed understanding of creation, which thinks creation isn’t just good but is very good, which means it doesn’t need redemption in the first place. That’s actual Christian endorsement, the kind that encourages pagans and believers alike in their efforts to keep doing creation, not Christians from redeeming it.
LikeLike
Ryan, As for Corinthians 14:15, “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding.” You quoted verse 14, which indeed does not comment on singing in any way. And as far as this verse in particular is concerned, I was trying to show the emphasis on the intellect in singing, which it has been shown in these posts can actually be done in a more robust way in hip-hop than many other mediums of art or genres of music.
Dr. Hart, I just wanted to say that I totally agree with you that “not every form of music has to be Mozart. But how about a melody? How about a progression of chords?” I think this is at the heart of the discussion. Rap really isn’t capable of the progression of chords that Mozart so ably instilled in his symphonies. What’s more, I don’t think rap ever intends to have that kind of progression (can you imagine the musical and lyrical progression in rap? it seems like one of these is usually the focus of a genre). The same can be said of most hymns I sing on Sunday… mere musical drivel when compared to Mozart But rap, in other ways, is a “higher” art form or, at least, a different kind of art form than classical. I would say it’s a closer relative to poetry than it is to classical music. The focus on lyrics and the message delivered can be used for great evil (self-promotion, sex, drugs, etc.) but can also be used for much good (communicating the good news, teaching doctrine, summarizing books of the Bible). And the fact that it’s focus is lyrical doesn’t disallow the use of drums, beat, rhythm, etc. I would be placing a burden too heavy for rap to bear if I believed it was the exact same kind of art as Mozart’s symphonies. But I’m not doing that. That is not rap’s burden. But the holy hip-hop movement has introduced content into rap that is morally and doctrinally excellent. Why is there then such a huge problem? Rap’s medium is lyric-centric and Lecrae and others have written excellent lyrics and, in their own way, have begun to redeem rap — never to be completed in a fallen world, I’m sure, just as Tim Keller will never completely redeem New York — but these rap artists are doing it as Christ’s church. The primary role of pastor and the clergy is the means of grace on Sunday morning… the role of its members is to display God’s glory in their individual callings, which could callings in hip-hop culture. Am I wrong in that statement?
LikeLike
DAY ONE (ONE!)
Know what I say? Let there be light (LIGHT), we can call it night and day.
(doo-danh-danh dee danh, shkah-shkah-shkah)
With the photons we are jammin’, and Tiamat we’re slammin’, no-one else besides the Holy One could ever make the earth and heaven. WORD!
Let there be light (LIGHT)
(doo-danh-danh dee danh, shkah-shkah-shkah)
Hm. Maybe something there. Or not.
LikeLike
Steve,
Ryan, the issue is not Mozart. Rap is inferior to Louis Armstrong and Wes Montgomery. There are classics and standards of jazz, too, you know. And that music is “black.”Given what has been admitted by everyone here, I’m not sure any believer is called to belong to hip-hop or male locker room culture.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
You said, “My objections to rap are like my objections to Aerosmith or Z Z Top. It doesn’t do anything for me musically. Not every form of music has to be Mozart. But how about a melody? How about a progression of chords?”
How about those chord progressions? You spoke approvingly of bluegrass music earlier, and I spent several years playing in a bluegrass band where lots of the songs had only 3 chords. Are those songs necessarily inferior? I’ve also played plenty of jazz and classical music. I’ve never found any other genre that can handle lyrical content the way that rap does. Would it be difficult for a congregation to sing along with? Certainly. Does it have an unusual ability to summarize and teach doctrine and Scripture in great detail? Absolutely.
There isn’t ANY genre of music that doesn’t have associations with sin. Bluegrass is filled with songs about alcohol and drug abuse, as well as violence. Much of the development of jazz was fueled by hard drug use. Classical music has tons of connections to sexual immorality, both in its original context and today.
All you seem to have said so far is a statement of your own preference. Do you think that Armstrong and Montgomery are inferior to Mozart? What about Mahler? Bach? What’s a the top of the heap?
Rap and classical music are completely different. Is a car better than a truck? Depends what you’re trying to do with it.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
I am not exactly sure why you have addressed me. I think you have simply typed the wrong name. No worries! Hopefully, one will refer to my post and recognize that I have made no case for the use of rap. Personally, I think some forms are less expressive and some are more. However, I do not use rap to evangelize. I submit to my church, receiving the Word, sacraments, prayer, and discipline as means of grace. Also, I encourage others to attend churches and hear the preached Word. Moreover, I do not refer to rap or Mozart to communicate the gospel. I try to walk in Christ and consequently submit to my Church, and so be a testament to his work. My wife submits to me as to demonstrate what God finds precious in His sight. We have found this to be more effective, not in redemptive terms, but in demonstrative terms over against “holy hip-hop” (whatever that means!), especially as it typifies Christ and his church. I take little interest in rap and even less in the Christian equivalents to the gang-filled, obscene, anti-authoritarian, self-promoting individualism that is common among these so called “rap greats.”
LikeLike
Andrew, the allusion to bluegrass was to appeal to the differences among mass, folk, and formal artistic expressions. Who patronizes and produces the music? Bluegrass and folk is generally produced by a particular culture that involves the members of that culture. Mass and formal music are produced and distributed by elites and listened to by people who usually don’t sing or share the music.
The appeal to formal qualities of music was to suggest that rap has not many musical accomplishments. It is an odd phenomenon where the text — a kind of poetry, is the vehicle with the music being background something. It just doesn’t seem to be music.
The appeal to Armstrong and Montgomery was to suggest that this is not a racial argument. How could it be since jazz, of which I am not a fan, is so much more musically superior to rap.
So what appears to be going for rap is that it is the expression of a particular people undergoing tremendous oppression — even though rap artists are no longer living in the hood or under oppression. Like most people, I think oppression is bad. But that is not the basis of an aesthetic argument.
LikeLike
Ryan, right. I meant to address Steve Johnson.
LikeLike
“Trim your wick or face the gun”…this would make a great cryptic bumpersticker until you get a visit from Homeland Security…
LikeLike
“Like most people, I think oppression is bad. But that is not the basis of an aesthetic argument.”
But your initial argument wasn’t an aesthetic one, but a moral one – in fact it was pretty much the inverse of Piper’s position.
And even judging relative aesthetic merits don’t lead to the conclusions you claim.
LikeLike
Chris E. Actually, the initial point was that rap is bad. That was an aesthetic argument. Taking a bad form and putting Christian doctrine in it doesn’t make any sense.
But I agree that this is a different point from Piper for whom the separation of form and content is fine.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
Thank you for the feedback thus far. It may seem futile, but you are helping several of us out!
You said: “Rap is inferior to Louis Armstrong and Wes Montgomery. There are classics and standards of jazz, too, you know. And that music is ‘black’ […] I’m not sure any believer is called to belong to hip-hop or male locker room culture.”
I think this is a similar extension of the previous discussion. Rap differs from classical music in a similar way that it does from jazz. And although jazz is historically “black,” there are indeed other types of musical expression within black culture that are running on a different car frame than jazz. As Andrew says, “Rap and classical music [and I would add jazz] are completely different. Is a car better than a truck? Depends what you’re trying to do with it.” So are rap and jazz trying to do the same thing? Are they attempting to evoke the same set of emotions? I don’t think they are. As Dan noted earlier in this post, “As a form, [rap] is also very well suited to evoking appropriate emotions of poignant sadness and other powerful (and righteous) emotions directed at the dark things in life. That makes it well suited, as a form, to the expression of the gospel. It is also well suited to apologetics, as I mentioned above.” These are areas that jazz music would not be well-suited for. Again, two great illustrations from Lecrae as to the expression of the gospel and use in apologetics:
“Take Me As I Am” — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po3k6sPHeX0
“Truth” — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDHxnd6VFWs
And compared to the standards of form within the rap genre, many of the holy hip-hop artists are making excellent rap music. I don’t know why there can’t be objective standards within rap itself. Why does it have to be broadened to black music as a whole? I understand that I could theoretically argue the same thing about “Doom and Gloom” (or excellence within the elevator music genre) but I think it’s a leap to say that a form of music is inferior when so many would disagree and form of the music (and lyrical emphasis) is complex. For example, any lay person could write a tune to match “Doom and Gloom” but could not do likewise to make a successful rap song. Granted, it would be easier to do so than to compose a symphony, but then a symphony does not require poetic or rhetorical talent.
And as Adam Pelser said earlier, “I suspect that many white American slave owners initially perceived black spirituals as inferior forms of cultural expression simply because they saw the culture out of which such spirituals arose as an inferior culture to their own […] rap at its best exhibits great poetic and rhetorical talent and it is not at all obvious, as others have pointed out, that rap is unduly suited for Christian expression.” There are many forms of Christian expression, and with no reason to believe that rap is inferior (inherently, at least; preference is a different issue), I believe that rap lies within the realm of Christian liberty. The Gospel Coalition then has the liberty to comment on this unique (and I would say encouraging) Christian movement within hip-hop culture.
LikeLike
If that dispensational dude is being ironic, he’s a genius.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
You haven’t even begun to make an argument for rap being bad. You’ve only asserted that it was so, as if this observation is so evident that no explanation is needed.
Leaving bluegrass aside, I’ll ask again– is it the harmonic and melodic simplicity that makes rap bad? Is poetry without a beat suitable for communicating doctrine and teaching God’s truth? If so, why is there suddenly a problem when you add a simple bass and drum track?
LikeLike
Andrew, I’m not sure the other side has made any argument for rap’s superiority as a form of music. How about it has no melody. Now I’m no fan of Bob Dylan. If you didn’t like his melody, you were stuck for all 22 stanzas. But at least he had a melody and I bet his lyrics are better than eminem’s.
But I’m dumbfounded that so many Christians are rallying to defend rap. Would they be so zealous for Billie Holiday?
LikeLike
Dr. Hart,
I’m not arguing for the overall superiority of rap, but I am absolutely arguing for its legitimacy and usefulness to individual believers, and also to the church. Rap is harmonically simple and lyrically complex, and in addition to being able to convey a quantity of content that no other current musical style can, rap is also perfectly suited to address theological conflict in a way that is clear, concise, and intense.
I’ll try to flesh this point about conflict out more, because I think it is very important. Secular post-moderns don’t know how to argue. They complain and accuse, but honest, manly argument and conflict is very rare. As a product of their culture, Christian men in this age are generally poorly equipped to take on the work of rebuking and correcting theological error. Of course there are exceptions, but the general level of competency, commitment, and zeal is low.
Rap is intrinsically conducive to explaining, rebuking, correcting, and even mocking unbiblical beliefs and teachings. Rap can also serve as a modern vehicle for catechising. Can you imagine trying to write a folk song that concisely explains the difference between justification, sanctification and glorification? You would end with a Bob Dylan’esque ballad with 22 stanzas, which neither you nor I particularly want to listen to.
On a slightly different slant, do you expect black Christians to adopt white musical tastes? Why would there be any need to defend rap unless it was being attacked?
I’m not sure I grasp the point of your reference to Billie Holiday. Are you implying that the motivation for defending rap is simply one of racial guilt among educated, white, reformed Christians? If not, what are you trying to say with that?
LikeLike
Andrew, why do we need music to explain the difference between justification and sanctification? That’s why God gave us catechisms. Preaching is pretty handy as well on calling people to repentance. I think you are working awfully hard to justify something you may like. Heck, I like The Wire. It doesn’t mean I have to recommend it to all Christians or justify it as a vehicle of Christian truth.
My point about Billie Holiday is only to note that there is plenty of “black” music. That means I am troubled by categorizing music according to race, which is why the Baylys’ classification of rap under “race” seems lame to me. Plus, I’m betting that most of the readers of Old Life are white and so the defenders of rap here are likely white. If blacks can’t assume white musical tastes, why can whites become such fans of rap? Isn’t that a little condescending to blacks, as if whites can handle a lot of different styles but blacks are limited?
LikeLike
Couple of observations:
(1) Scripture doesn’t require us to believe that this genre of music or that is superior or inferior, or even that they can be compared. Which is the best fruit?
(2) The question of superiority of genre should not be confused with the question of superiority of composition. Mozart and Beethoven wrote in different genre, but are arguably equal in compositional genius.
(3) If I get to be as utterly subjective as the rest, I would say that rap is superior to 20th century atonal art music. Jes sayin.
LikeLike
I find incredible that rap—of all things—would be so vehemently defended by some. There is no inherent value in listening rap, no aesthetic quality worthy of discussion, no superiority of form, etc. It is just a bunch of lyrics, usually spoken too quickly to understand or with too little compositional integrity, with a predictably common beat. That is not a racially motivated comment. Rap music performed by whites, blacks, or others sound similar. Why do Christians feel the need to make a better version of it or redeemed version (whatever that means!), let alone catechize with it? And who listens to rap or any other music for the purposes of learning theology or doctrine? I hope we don’t construct theological systems around Lecrae songs or Puritan hymns! I hope we are attending churches who preach the Word, administer the sacraments, pray, disciple, etc., receiving these as means of grace, responding in corporate worship, and so on, not “jamming to hip-hop songs in the car as a substitute or supplement.
LikeLike
Ryan, in case it wasn’t clear, my Jan 8 was a tongue-in-cheek Waltke meets DC Talk meets New Living Translation affair.
LikeLike
“(1) Scripture doesn’t require us to believe that this genre of music or that is superior or inferior, or even that they can be compared. Which is the best fruit?”
Jeff, yes and no. It’s true that the scriptures don’t require the analysis, but the failure to meet that criteria doesn’t make an analysis frivolous. Then, “fruit”? You mean New Testament spiritual fruit? To make an aesthetic analysis based on such “fruit” is to mix apples and oranges.
“I find incredible that rap—of all things—would be so vehemently defended by some.”
Ryan, Rap, grew out of and reflects a human culture that was powerful enough to produce its own music. Same goes for jazz, rock, and bluegrass. To reject the music would feel like rejecting the culture, and formative life experiences as well. In that light, its not too incredible that rap would be vehemently defended by some. Personally, I don’t know the line between aesthetics and cultural bigotry so I am hesitant to denounce an entire genre of music.
LikeLike
Michael,
In view of your response, my statement should have read as follows: “I find incredible that culture–of all things–would be so vehemently defended by some. The church has always been transcultural and cross-cultural. She has instructed us to abstain from worldliness, to set our minds on things above, not below, to seek a better country, and to recognize that we are sojourners and pilgrims, For all the transformationalist rhetoric, you think someone would be concerned with the transforming of ourselves by the renewing of our minds, so we are not conformed to this world but to Christ.
What do you mean that you hesitate to denounce an entire genre of music? Why? Why do you hesitate? Why are you so concerned with culture? It’s rap music! If you like it, good. If you only listen to rap with biblical content, great! But there is nothing special about it. I have no problem rejecting the t.v. even though it is a powerful cultural product. I have no problem. I often feel (and sorry for the judgment) that so many defenders of culture are simply too attached to it and have been too affected by it to recognize that it has such a dangerous stranglehold on them. I also believe it impairs our understanding of the role and function of the church within any given culture. It is not to redeem a bunch of musical or literary genres, arts and crafts, or entertainment, but to grow in sanctification the whole body and to present us complete, not lacking in anything, to Christ in full submission. In some instances, this may include an effect on culture, its structures and forms, and its products, but more importantly, it has a corporate effect on the body of believers.
LikeLike
Ryan, to clear away some possible misunderstandings, I am not speaking of “christian” music, nor of music-as-sanctifying-influence. I am just talking about music.
I’ll follow you up to a point. Yes, we are sojourners so there is a limit to how tightly we cling to culture, including music. But we are not disembodied spirits, so we engage in culture and its comforts. I would put music in there with a lot of other things – ethnic food, manner of dress, and unwritten rules of social discourse. There is an objective way to analyze such things up to a point, but to pick one genre of expression as superior does smack of, as I say, cultural bigotry and narrowmindedness.
Maybe it’s BECAUSE we are sojourners that we should not be dogmatic about such things and quickly denounce entire genres. These, on the whole, are not spiritual distinctions so they should not divide us. A rapper, crooner, and opera singer ought to be able to sit in the pew next to each other without the distraction of calling one of their genres the ultimate one, unless they can do so in a light-hearted way. I have no taste for rap or country music, and would pronounce the death sentence on all who like the Beach Boys or the Bee Gees. I might have the Miami Vice theme song in all elevators, as well, but all these would simply be absolutizing my preferences. So, when it comes to music, laissez faire or, as the Cars once sang, laissez les bon temps roulez.
LikeLike
I have not made the point that rap is inherently bad. If a child is bad, it does not necessarily mean that the child’s grandfather was bad. Pornographic literature is bad, but I do not think that pictures or writing are bad, per se. Obviously, the content, use, and intent are all important considerations. I do not think it is worth belaboring but opera is not as bad as rap, generally. But there could be cases! I do not care much for rap. Also, I think most rap that Christians listen to is awful. Listening to Kanye West, DMX, and others, who claim to be Christians, do much harm. The form itself does not merit a claim that it is bad, but the expression is rarely good. It is not cultural bigotry to speak against certain forms or expressions of culture as wrong. But it confuses me that it is culture that people jump to defend, even when they will admit that the people are doing the wrong thing. People will defend rap music, but not DMX (or whoever is popular!). I cannot take seriously your claim of cultural bigotry! If anything, my belief that one form or expression is not as healthy as others is equally as valid as your opinion that rap as a form of cultural expression is not necessarily inferior. I am not saying my preferences are better than others’. I am saying that preferences are only preferences, not worthy of defense.
LikeLike
Well, I will have to defer to your judgment since you are more of an expert, having listened to much more rap music, i.e., exposed yourself to more inherently bad and harmful influence, than I have. You win. (winky face)
LikeLike
Michael,
Thank you and your winky face for the concession!
LikeLike
Ryan,
You said, “If anything, my belief that one form or expression is not as healthy as others is equally as valid as your opinion that rap as a form of cultural expression is not necessarily inferior. I am not saying my preferences are better than others’. I am saying that preferences are only preferences, not worthy of defense.”
Preferences are only preferences,so I agree with you there.
However, when Dr Hart wrote about, “the disconnect between the forms of rap and the content of sound doctrine” he is most definitely NOT making a simple statement of his preference. I don’t tell people who don’t like rap that they have to change their own tastes and make themselves enjoy it, but I do take exception to Dr. Hart saying that rap and sound doctrine can’t go together. When he was asked to clarify, he talked about how rap doesn’t “do anything for him musically.” First he made an objective statement about the unsuitability of rap to convey sound doctrine, and then he switched gears and argued that it’s really only an issue of his preference, while carefully working to make it look like myself and others who had questions were trying very hard to defend something… unsavory– the “Methinks the lady doth protest too much” defense.
Either there is something inherently wrong with rap, or there isn’t. A man can’t have it both ways. Either the issue with rap is one of preference, or it isn’t.
Because Dr. Hart is a teacher and writer whose works are well known, he has a greater obligation to be clear and straightforward when he speaks and writes. If he doesn’t like rap, that’s fine, but he can’t make a blanket statement about it being incompatible with sound doctrine unless he’s willing to do the legwork of showing the particulars. So far, he hasn’t done that.
LikeLike
Andrew,
I understand that Dr. Hart has not been as clear as he could be on rap as an inherently evil form or rap as a preference without an intrinsically inferior expression. I am certainly no mouthpiece of his, but I would wager that his position is not as either-or as many would like. For me, rap is not evil per se. However, it would have to be divorced of much its culture and content. I believe many would agree that most rap characterizes much unworthy of imitation. I think rap is a matter of preference, but that does not make it good. I certainly wouldn’t defend it as superior. I do not intend to paint rap with a broad brush, but rap is generally not the best representation of neutral cultural forms. It has created a perception of its own, by its early proponents and message. Certainly, opera need not overcome such perceptions. I may not like rap or what it generally represents, but that does not mean that I believe that a black male should not write some lyrics to a 4/4 beat and “rap” some Bible verses.
LikeLike
Andrew, who said rap was inherently evil? I would claim it is not a fitting vehicle for sound doctrine on doctrinal, cultural, and aesthetic grounds. I’d say the same for Leave It to Beaver. The point of bringing it up was to note that the same folks who promoted Piper’s remarks on the disconnect between God’s glory and movies, don’t see any disconnect between Calvinism and rap.
LikeLike
Dr Hart,
I can only infer that you didn’t read my comment. I never said that you called rap “evil.”
“I would claim it is not a fitting vehicle for sound doctrine on doctrinal, cultural, and aesthetic grounds.”
Can you please explain WHY?
I’m especially curious to hear the doctrinal reasons.
LikeLike
Andrew, I have tried to answer this many times. But when it comes to the sorts of virtues for which Paul calls in Titus 2, modesty, self-control, submissiveness, does rap really come to mind as the first cultural expression you’re going to offer to Paul as “man, this sure is fitting sound doctrine, isn’t it?”
Sometimes the reasons may be intuitive, as in you know it when you see it.
LikeLike
Andrew,
I think Dr. Hart is hitting on a fundamental issue of form and function as we communicate doctrinal truth. I grew up in the construction industry, and one of the fundamental axioms of architecture is “form follows function”. This is why a basketball arena is markedly different than a courtroom. An arena (form) is perfectly suitable for a college basketball game (function), whereas a courtroom is wholly inadequate for sporting events. Even if you were to persuade me that all musical forms are basically inert, that they are all equally appropriate for every function. Movie makers know this, if they want you to be deeply moved, they might utilize the 2nd half of “Jupiter” in Holst’s The Planets, but they won’t use Metallica’s “Enter Sandman”. Even if we were to say that forms are inert and that there is nothing inherently sinful about rap as a cultural/musical form, that doesn’t mean it is an appropriate form to communicate fundamental Christian truth. I personally don’t have a problem with rap as a form of musical expression, since some rap does actually have good content and cultural critique.
However, by in large, rap has become a pop-cultural form used to communicate the same banal realities that most pop music does. The multiple genres that comprise the form of pop music have the explicit function of generally mindless or even worse mind-numbing entertainment. You can argue about the fact that the form is sanctified when it communicates Christian truth. This is what the CCM crowd has convinced itself of, and what most conservative Christians have come to believe regardless of denominational affiliation. They have basically accepted that forms don’t matter so long as their use is “sanctified”. The problem with this is that pop culture has amassed it’s ubiquitous status in society by commodifying and trivializing culture with musical forms such as rap, R&B, contemporary country, and rock among a few other styles. Cultural expression in this structure is only valuable for its power to entertain and generate profit. The dilemma for Christians is that when they use these forms to communicate doctrinal truth is that they run the risk of being yet another commodity in the cultural market. They essentially become another product to be bought and sold and their truth is yet another voice competing against Jay-z, U2, Lady GaGa, and any other pop artist out there. Christians will continue to struggle with this until they take a serious look at form-function issues as they pertain to the communication of their message, both internally in the worship within the church, and externally as a means of “outreach”. I think that regardless of where you stand on the issue, you have to answer the question of whether or not Christian truth should be communicated through pop cultural avenues of expression, given these three factors: a) that you risk giving the Christian message the cultural perception of an ideology on par with the general subjects of pop music – sex, drugs, money, and tawdry romance; b) that the truth is just another means of entertainment; and c) that you risk reducing the truth into a commodity to be bought and sold for a profit.
Historically, until the modern era, music has basically served a “lower” folk function, and a “higher” cultic function. In either case, neither were used as products for mass consumption. They were vehicles for reflecting on the human experience, or for worship. The folk forms were accessible to the society at large, the high forms were used for liturgical purposes. There may have been a few additional uses, such as in dramas. But the majority of musical expression throughout history has existed without a “profit motive”. However, music has become another product to sell, and the artistic expressions of human experience became subject to market forces, which usually demands the most obnoxious forms for the sake of entertainment.
This is why folk and high cultural forms have traditionally shaped the worship of the Church. They aren’t prone to the banality of pop culture. The forms aren’t necessarily inherently superior to pop forms in terms of the morality of the musicality, it is just that these forms aren’t as prone to commodification as pop forms are. I personally am inclined to the folk expression because of their accessibility in worship. Some high-church types will use more complex, high cultural forms, as a means of invoking reverence and awe on the part of the worshiper, and these high forms are used to capture the gravity of the truth they communicate. But there are some very valid arguments against the use of music at all, see R. Scott Clark’s Recovering the Reformed Confession as a compelling example.
LikeLike
Bad typo in the 1st paragraph 5th sentence, it should read …it is a real stretch to say that they are all equally appropriate for every function. Sorry.
LikeLike
Jed, you make some excellent observations. I would add that our reception of musical genres is not static. As an example, there is a song in the Blue Trinity Hymnal that goes by the tune of “America the Beautiful.” It would seem inappropriate to so closely associate patriotism and worship, and that’s how I felt the first several times I sang it. Now that I have been singing this hymn for the last 15 years, that association has dissipated and is no longer a distraction. Then consider rock; judging strictly by its roots, it would not seem like an apt vehicle for expressing moral or relgious conviction. However, I know of at least one album (War by U2) in which that medium is used quite well to express moral and religious convictions. The Blues,likewise, would not seem like a fitting vehicle for religious content, but I know of at least one album that pulls it off quite nicely. (BTW, how about a blues album based on Ecclesiastes?)
In the year 2010 we have certain ideas associated with rap because we are close to its birth. Over time those associations may weaken and that vehicle may, in its own way, be able to carry religious convictions.
I do agree with the idea the some media just aren’t fit for carrying certain ideas. I once witnessed some kind of youth group or parachurch group pray over their food to the tune of the Addams Family theme; highly irreverent, IMO. So, there is an objective analyis that can be done, but we have to realize that the suitability of certain genres for certain expressions is a culturally conditioned one that can change over time.
Now for a short anecdote. One early morning my daughter, confused as to the time of day, went downstairs to the piano and played a low note loudly. I immediately woke up in great fear, convinced that something dreadful had happened in our house. Now, why did I think that? Did I have that fear because the note is an inherent vehicle for doom, or because it has been used that way in movies? Culture or inherent property? I think it is a cultural perception, but I am guessing a historian of music would tell us that note has almost always been associated with dark kinds of ideas.
LikeLike
Jed, Michael, Dr. Hart,
I meant to reply sooner but this has been a busy week for me.
Jed: of course form follows function. I don’t disagree. You said, “Even if we were to say that forms are inert and that there is nothing inherently sinful about rap as a cultural/musical form, that doesn’t mean it is an appropriate form to communicate fundamental Christian truth.”
Does the same argument apply to all forms of music? What makes one more acceptable than another, if we posit that all are theoretically inert?
Michael, you said, “In the year 2010 we have certain ideas associated with rap because we are close to its birth. Over time those associations may weaken and that vehicle may, in its own way, be able to carry religious convictions.”
What is the half-life of a new musical form before the radioactivity surrounding the circumstances of its birth are sufficiently reduced for Christians to begin to gingerly test it out to determine if it can “carry religious convictions?” Music should communicate God’s Truth. Let’s call it what it is.
Dr. Hart, you implied that rap is inherently opposed to modesty, self-control and submissiveness. Like any form of music, it certainly can be opposed to those, but it is not necessarily so. The quality and integrity of the music has everything to do with the men who are writing it. If it’s all about them then yes, we have a problem. When you read the first chapter of Titus, where Paul describes the work that overseers are to do in the church: “give sound instruction… rebuke those who contradict… silence those who are insubordinate, empty talkers, deceivers etc,” try to imagine a musical style that could matches the intent and intensity of that work. What comes to mind? Classical? Bluegrass? Really?
LikeLike
Andrew,
Jed: of course form follows function. I don’t disagree. You said, “Even if we were to say that forms are inert and that there is nothing inherently sinful about rap as a cultural/musical form, that doesn’t mean it is an appropriate form to communicate fundamental Christian truth.â€
Does the same argument apply to all forms of music? What makes one more acceptable than another, if we posit that all are theoretically inert?
I wouldn’t argue that forms are inert, that was a hypothetical. But I’ll indulge you here, you would have to evaluate what forms are used for what. What is classical music used for, folk, rock, rap, etc. You will likely see a great divide between “pop” forms, and generally non-commercial forms. The divide will highlight not only stylistic differences, but very different content as well. Then you would have to ask whether or not you are commodifying Biblical truth when using pop forms. Culturally speaking this is why African American forms such as gospel music might be more appropriate than a pop form like rap to communicate biblical truth.
The problem is that you seem to acknowledge the form-function axiom, but then take it away with the other hand, give any form that “communicates God’s truth” a pass. Essentially you haven’t asked about the appropriateness of one form as a vehicle for communicating Biblical truth versus another at all. I am sure you were only trying to answer briefly, but you haven’t interacted with the substance of my response. If you don’t have time, that’s fine, otherwise, I’d be more interested to see how you deal with the points I laid out for you.
LikeLike
Jed,
I agree that forms are not inert. I tried to show that I was playing along with your hypothetical for the sake of the discussion. Hopefully I can be clearer.
I wonder what exactly you mean when you say “Non-commercial” forms. Which styles in particular do you generally consider to be non-commercial?
I don’t give any form that “communicates God’s truth” a pass, but I do think it’s important that we take a hard look at current styles because music is an important tool for our use in the work of making the Gospel comprehensible to our culture. I’m not arguing that reformed churches everywhere need to include rap in their services, but I think it can have a legitimate place in the lives of Christians. I would take rap any day over the maudlin, effeminate drivel that is CCM.
LikeLike
Just a quick aside.
Rap is a folk form. Disagree?
LikeLike
Andrew, do you really think that pastors or elders should sing when giving guidance or correction to a believer? Have you been watching too many musicals?
Sorry, but this seems a pretty weak reed upon which to hang your affinity for rap.
LikeLike
Andrew, the rap that you hear, unless you’re living around Eight Mile with emenem, is not folk since it is recorded and produced by corporations run by executives that likely don’t know a lick about rap. Folk music is music produced and sung by a group, like people who live in a town and go to their local pub to sing songs TOGETHER, not along with a recording. Most music that we listen to on the radio or internet is not folk since it is not part of a local community and its culture. Hymns may be one of the last expressions we have of religious folk culture.
LikeLike
Darryl,
You missed my point completely.
Rap has obviously been commercialized, but it began as a folk form. Record Labels didn’t conjure it up out of thin air.
I wasn’t suggesting that pastors and elders rap in counseling. You’re just being obtuse. When I said “matches the intensity,” I did mean it. Rap is intense. For communicating certain scriptural truths, this intensity is a very good thing. That was my point.
I write poetry. Alot of poetry “slams” are essentially free form rap battles. Add a beat and you have rap, not just poetry. How is this not folk?
LikeLike
Darryl said: “But I’d prefer to have worldliness straight, not cut with Holy Unction.” This was over at the Front Porch Republic web site. I’ll nominate that as the best line I’ve read or heard so far in this new year. I almost fell out my chair with laughter. He was refering to the GC types who have high hopes for redeeming the rap and hip-hop culture. This fellow (his name is Lucretious or something like that) who is a Calvinist rapper has a moving story but one has to wonder if his emphasis is perhaps a bit misguided and more of a distraction from the deeper issues at stake (read: misconstruing the mission of the Church). I think Darryl’s essay at the Front Porch Republic is as many now say these days “spot on.”
The thing you gotta love about Hart is that he has the courage to put himself out there where the neo-Cals, emergents and charismatics can take aim and fire. I do not know any other 2kers (besides Zrim) who are doing that on a daily basis. I have learned more on this site in regards to defending a liturgical-confessional faith than any other. However, I am intrigued by this proto-protestant fellow. His site is well worth taking the time to browse a bit (http://www.proto-protestantism.blogspot.org).
LikeLike
That site is http://www.proto-protestantism.blogspot.com
LikeLike
That rappers name is LeCrae not Lucretious. As the lead article of this post stated.
LikeLike
To think that Christians can redeem the hip-hop or rap culture is a bit grandiose. It is kind of like thinking you can cure the sin problem or crack and heroine addiction through efforts of our own wills. God is the only one who can cure our sin problem and the scriptures are pretty plain that he does it through the simple and humble means of grace (Word and Sacrament)
As the pc-2kers often say what needs to be redeemed about the culture? People are what need to be redeemed, not cultures. People may need to be rescued from cultures and placed in the Kingdom of God in the Church but redeeming culture is more the work of God when Christ comes again then the Church’s responsibility. I am becoming more and more convinced that the Kingdom comes through Word and Sacrament alone in the Church and attempts to redeem any part of the culture of the Kingdom of man is an exercise in futility and not the real mission of the Church. It is a huge and misguided distraction.
LikeLike
Andrew, I don’t think you caught my point either. Counseling is a bad analogy to justify rap. First, why would you necessarily think that counseling is intense. Might not charitable be a good outlook?
And on the folk side, once it goes commercial it is no longer folk. That’s the rule.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, I’m afraid that while this is the Worst Christian Video of the Year, your runner-up may already exist in the Sarah Palin Battle Hymn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhMepzqJvIw&feature=player_embedded
LikeLike