<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Musical Fundamentalism II</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mikeshaw.net/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1412" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412</link>
	<description>Conan, what is best in life?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:55:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412&#038;cpage=1#comment-122401</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412#comment-122401</guid>
		<description>Mike,

Thank you for your response to my questions.  In my analysis, I said that I would depend on Old Testament theologian John Makujina&#039;s exegesis of several scriptural passages in order to assert music&#039;s universal ability to communicate objectively.  Have you read his book, &quot;Measuring the Music&quot;? 

His case regarding universal musical principles is compelling, both biblically and musically.  There is separate scientific proof that bears it out, if you&#039;re interested.  I would strongly encourage you to read it if you haven&#039;t.  If you only have time for a short read, skip right to Appendix C.  

If I understand correctly, your argument seems to be based on the notion (roughly paraphrased) that musical style is culture-specific, and that being culture-specific, it cannot be judged except from the perspective of that culture.  (Forgive me if I put words into your mouth or don&#039;t say it in the way you would defend it.)   This is tantamount to saying that no universal exists, with the accompanying implication that musical styles themselves may not be judged good or bad.  Makujina elsewhere points out that this line of thinking denies the effect of the Fall, if not on the discipline of music itself, then on the broader category of musical style, resulting in a Pelagian error in regard to man&#039;s musical creations:  Man Can Do No Wrong in Music.  

In fact, universals always exist with God.  There is no such thing as a gray area.  While we may not always be able to see them perfectly or clearly, it is our job to seek to discern.

Though not a musical rule book, God&#039;s Word is replete with principles for discerning good music.

Sorry to disagree, Mike.  Music contains the same acoustical elements across cultures: duration, frequency, amplitude, and waveform.  These elements are combined in various ways to create what we call style ( which is really a system of probabilities and expectations) - and all of them are tainted to varying degrees with sin, like all of man&#039;s creations.  We are commanded by God to discern from among them what is excellent, lovely, pure, and noble.  We don&#039;t get to exclude music or musical style from our discerning.
   
I&#039;d appreciate it if we could continue this conversation on Religious Affections Ministries blogsite, where the analysis was posted.

Thanks!

Tim</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>Thank you for your response to my questions.  In my analysis, I said that I would depend on Old Testament theologian John Makujina&#8217;s exegesis of several scriptural passages in order to assert music&#8217;s universal ability to communicate objectively.  Have you read his book, &#8220;Measuring the Music&#8221;? </p>
<p>His case regarding universal musical principles is compelling, both biblically and musically.  There is separate scientific proof that bears it out, if you&#8217;re interested.  I would strongly encourage you to read it if you haven&#8217;t.  If you only have time for a short read, skip right to Appendix C.  </p>
<p>If I understand correctly, your argument seems to be based on the notion (roughly paraphrased) that musical style is culture-specific, and that being culture-specific, it cannot be judged except from the perspective of that culture.  (Forgive me if I put words into your mouth or don&#8217;t say it in the way you would defend it.)   This is tantamount to saying that no universal exists, with the accompanying implication that musical styles themselves may not be judged good or bad.  Makujina elsewhere points out that this line of thinking denies the effect of the Fall, if not on the discipline of music itself, then on the broader category of musical style, resulting in a Pelagian error in regard to man&#8217;s musical creations:  Man Can Do No Wrong in Music.  </p>
<p>In fact, universals always exist with God.  There is no such thing as a gray area.  While we may not always be able to see them perfectly or clearly, it is our job to seek to discern.</p>
<p>Though not a musical rule book, God&#8217;s Word is replete with principles for discerning good music.</p>
<p>Sorry to disagree, Mike.  Music contains the same acoustical elements across cultures: duration, frequency, amplitude, and waveform.  These elements are combined in various ways to create what we call style ( which is really a system of probabilities and expectations) &#8211; and all of them are tainted to varying degrees with sin, like all of man&#8217;s creations.  We are commanded by God to discern from among them what is excellent, lovely, pure, and noble.  We don&#8217;t get to exclude music or musical style from our discerning.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d appreciate it if we could continue this conversation on Religious Affections Ministries blogsite, where the analysis was posted.</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Tim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412&#038;cpage=1#comment-122097</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412#comment-122097</guid>
		<description>Hi Tim, I &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; enjoy your analysis.

&lt;em&gt;You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?&lt;/em&gt;

It&#039;s not that it is unBiblical...meaning opposed.  And I hesitate to say that extra-Biblical because that has its own set of connotations.

It is an analysis rooted in certain lines of western thought in regard to music and poetry.  A very good and thorough analysis.  But it is not universal in application.  

Certainly if you&#039;re putting together a worship service for people who are of that musical culture, then it&#039;s 100% applicable.  

I did read your analysis of the Indelible grace tune, and I think this is more of what I&#039;m talking about w/r/t &quot;Musical Fundamentalism&quot;.  You bridge the gap between the tactics of music and scripture, but it is by the culture and tradition of your musical standard.  This is fine if you&#039;re operating within that culture and tradition, but it&#039;s of limited effect otherwise.

I&#039;m fairly certain you&#039;d be even harder on my own Hymn re-works.  But I know many people who find the more historical renditions to be far less effective than what contemporary artists have done.  Does that make them more scriptural?  No.  More effective?  In some cases.

The analysis of other music styles as &quot;depraved&quot; and &quot;slothful&quot; is not directly Biblically based.  It absolutely requires a filter of a source culture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tim, I <strong>do</strong> enjoy your analysis.</p>
<p><em>You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?</em></p>
<p>It&#8217;s not that it is unBiblical&#8230;meaning opposed.  And I hesitate to say that extra-Biblical because that has its own set of connotations.</p>
<p>It is an analysis rooted in certain lines of western thought in regard to music and poetry.  A very good and thorough analysis.  But it is not universal in application.  </p>
<p>Certainly if you&#8217;re putting together a worship service for people who are of that musical culture, then it&#8217;s 100% applicable.  </p>
<p>I did read your analysis of the Indelible grace tune, and I think this is more of what I&#8217;m talking about w/r/t &#8220;Musical Fundamentalism&#8221;.  You bridge the gap between the tactics of music and scripture, but it is by the culture and tradition of your musical standard.  This is fine if you&#8217;re operating within that culture and tradition, but it&#8217;s of limited effect otherwise.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m fairly certain you&#8217;d be even harder on my own Hymn re-works.  But I know many people who find the more historical renditions to be far less effective than what contemporary artists have done.  Does that make them more scriptural?  No.  More effective?  In some cases.</p>
<p>The analysis of other music styles as &#8220;depraved&#8221; and &#8220;slothful&#8221; is not directly Biblically based.  It absolutely requires a filter of a source culture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412&#038;cpage=1#comment-120110</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 05:17:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412#comment-120110</guid>
		<description>I wonder if these are the same guys that I heard doing a rap about exegesis, eisegesis, and hermeneutics.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder if these are the same guys that I heard doing a rap about exegesis, eisegesis, and hermeneutics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412&#038;cpage=1#comment-120007</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 01:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeshaw.net/?p=1412#comment-120007</guid>
		<description>Dear Mike,

I appreciate the nice comments you made about the analysis I did on the NICAEA hymn tune. I have some questions about the other comments you made, though.

You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?

Why do you state that an analysis such as this would not work for other styles? Why not? Did you see the other analysis I did for a praise chorus by Scott Roley of Indelible Grace? If not, you might want to take a look at it here:

http://religiousaffectionsministries.org/musical-analysis-roley-and-can-it-be-shafer

In what way do you believe cultural judgments were made in the analysis? Can you point to examples?

Finally, though I don’t know the GnR tune you mention, I’d be glad to take a look at it to see how it compares biblically against a fine tune like NICAEA.

Thanks, Mike.

Tim</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mike,</p>
<p>I appreciate the nice comments you made about the analysis I did on the NICAEA hymn tune. I have some questions about the other comments you made, though.</p>
<p>You assert that the analysis is not biblical. In what way or ways do you think it is not?</p>
<p>Why do you state that an analysis such as this would not work for other styles? Why not? Did you see the other analysis I did for a praise chorus by Scott Roley of Indelible Grace? If not, you might want to take a look at it here:</p>
<p><a href="http://religiousaffectionsministries.org/musical-analysis-roley-and-can-it-be-shafer" rel="nofollow">http://religiousaffectionsministries.org/musical-analysis-roley-and-can-it-be-shafer</a></p>
<p>In what way do you believe cultural judgments were made in the analysis? Can you point to examples?</p>
<p>Finally, though I don’t know the GnR tune you mention, I’d be glad to take a look at it to see how it compares biblically against a fine tune like NICAEA.</p>
<p>Thanks, Mike.</p>
<p>Tim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
