I listen to a lot of metal and hardcore music. I’m in a metal band with a couple of my friends. They aren’t the most religious people in the world, but they’re decent people. They don’t drink, smoke, or do drugs. I’m an all around music guy. I’ve been playing piano for 10 years now, I love classical music, and I love jazz etc. I’ve been singing at church since I was 8. But I would like to ask, is it ok for me to play metal? Is there anything saying that listening to metal with a bad message is a sin or whatever? Since my lead singer in the band isn’t very religious he doesn’t care as much about writing lyrics that may be a little edgy. But since I am not writing that, does that make me a bad person? I love playing metal, and I enjoy playing shows and I do not want to quit the band that I’ve developed a personal relationship with. Does God care since I am basically a very good person on the inside? There’s a quote by St. Paul saying something along the lines of “Whether you drink or whether you eat, whatever you do, do it for God’s glory.” I’m not necessarily doing that with metal, but I’m not going to let my singer say “God is bad Satan 666” or whatever the stereotypical thing is. So what I am asking is if you would give me something close to a general Christian standpoint on metal music etc. Please help me out, as you see I am very concerned.

There are of course many Christians with very firm opinions that metal (or any rock or pop music) is Satanic in influence and will place the listener’s soul in mortal danger. However, it should be pointed out that many of the scare stories perpetuated in contemporary Christian culture, including ‘backmasked’ Satanist messages hidden on records, or that rock and roll borrows rhythms from pagan or animist religions, are little more than urban legends. Often it appears that personal preference for particular types of music leads to certain sounds being labelled as ‘Satanic’.

However, there are genuine reasons for Christians to be concerned about some of the imagery and language used in modern music, not just metal. Sexual immorality, violence and nihilism are present in most types of music. Listening to these sentiments seems to go against the instruction of the apostle Paul to the Philippians that: “Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable – if anything is excellent or praiseworthy – think about these things.” (Philippians chapter 4, verse

However, it is still possible to admire the instrumentalist’s skill, lyrical deftness, or the overall musical ability of musicians who would not define themselves as Christian. Music itself is a neutral thing; the only way it is morally ‘bad’ is if it is used to convey negative emotions. In that way ‘music’ becomes the means by which sin is promoted and transmitted, but only because it has been ‘charged’ that way by the musician. In itself it is not inherently evil.

In this situation, however, being part of a group that is promoting a particular world-view does make a Christian accountable. One of the main thrusts of Christianity is that it insists that human beings are responsible for their actions. So by being a member of an ‘edgy’ metal band there is in some sense a shared responsibility for that ‘edginess’ regardless of how involved a member is in the songwriting process. It is perfectly possible that any unease felt by a Christian in that situation was the prompting of the Holy Spirit, activating their conscience about their involvement.

However, Christians are called to live as ‘salt and light’ in the world (see Matthew chapter 5, verses 13-16), with the idea that like salt they are spread throughout the world to bring flavour, cleansing or healing. (Salt in New Testament times was frequently used for medicinal and cleansing purposes, as well as for preserving and flavouring food.) There is no doubt that being friends with non-Christian metallers may be challenging for Christians, but it does provide an opportunity for reaching a hard-to-reach sub-culture with the good news of Jesus Christ. Living out faith in such a circle of friends may cause tension, but it may also provide the perfect arena for a Christian to glorify God through a positive use of musical giftings.

Thanks for your question TR.

I’ve heard a lot about the various forms of Christian mission today – some say that mission is merely proclaiming God’s word, yet others would say that mission is taking care of the world we live in (e.g. Green Peace). What does God’s call want us to be involved in when it comes to spreading His word and mission, and does our environmental concerns come under the umbrella of mission today?

Christianity has been an expansionist religion ever since the recorded journeys of the apostle Paul in the book of Acts. Paul’s ‘missionary journeys’ when preaching and proclamation seemed to take precedence have become the blueprints for people as diverse as the Celtic saints like Columba, David and Patrick, the Roman Catholic monastic order known as the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), evangelical protestant heroes like C.T. Studd and Hudson Taylor and trailblazing non-conformists like John Wesley. In each case the ‘missionaries’ involved have been keen to ‘take the gospel to people’, especially to foreign lands as new worlds of exploration opened up.

Certainly a number of missionary societies in evangelical protestant Christianity regard ‘mission’ in these terms – the stereotype would be to ‘proclaim the gospel and convert the heathen’. But there has been a broadening of horizons in the last half of the twentieth century, with mission seen less as ‘proclaiming the gospel’ and more as ‘showing the Kingdom’. This perhaps stems from the rise in post-modernism. The ‘modern’ world-view is characterised by expansion and conquest. The ‘missions’ of the nineteenth century that piggy-backed European political imperialism were certainly ‘modern’ in that sense and have recently been subject to much unfair retrospective criticism as a result. Post-modern mission, if it even exists, would see itself as presenting a better way of doing things; an exemplary gospel that encouraged people to ‘live like this’.

Certainly the growth of the environmentalist movement is directly linked to the emergence of post-modern culture and considerations. The environmentalist agenda often includes an interest in the ‘spiritual’, but many Christians dismiss this as ‘New Age’ and are unwilling to engage with people who may be looking in the wrong places, but are at least looking for something. It could be argued that the Church generally is locked in a modern mindset, fighting ideological battles on rational and semi-scientific grounds, which would explain why Christians missed the opportunity to introduce Christ to those people rediscovering the beauty of creation.

If Christians are serious about mission today, then a move away from ‘modern’ methods would result in a more holistic approach to mission as ‘life in the Kingdom of God’. It is fair to say that environmental concerns would come under that umbrella, simply because the Kingdom is about doing things differently, according to God’s agenda. Pollution, global warming, wanton destruction of the natural world and the extinction of species are not part of God’s Edenic ideal. Nor do they feature in any ideal habitat for human beings.

The evangelical method of bringing people to Christ by imposing an immediate decision on an individual to choose their eternal destiny on the spot or risk going to hell seems to have held sway forever. But I recently read a book, which suggested that this approach only became popular in the Methodist movement under John Wesley. What pattern emerges from the Bible when God counts someone as “righteous” or “redeemed” and therefore fit to spend eternity with Him? Is this how God does it?

There are several instances in both testaments of people being given a one-off opportunity to claim some form of salvation. “Choose this day whom you will serve” (Joshua chapter 24 and verse 15) and similar injunctions to the people of Israel are mirrored by instances in the New Testament where those who hear the ‘good news’ are given clear instructions (e.g. Acts chapter 2 verse 38) that they have to follow.

However, the emphasis on human choice that Wesley prioritised stems from his belief that human free will was the deciding factor in an individual’s salvation. The Bible is less than clear regarding the question of free will (hence the long-running debate over predestination), but it is fair to say that humans have some sort of say in the matter. Jesus tells his disciples that “You did not choose me, but I chose you…” (John chapter 15, verse 16) and that seems to imply that sometimes the choice is out of our hands. In the history of Israel, many ‘righteous persons’ were chosen almost arbitrarily. Abraham and Noah were counted as righteous enough to found God’s chosen people and survive an apocalyptic flood respectively. Neither of them ever responded to an altar call.

Jesus often left people with a choice to make. The Rich Young Man, who’s story is told in Luke chapter 16, was faced with a choice in how he was going to live his life and what would be his priority from now on. Interestingly, he chose to walk away, much to Jesus’ sadness. Later in Christian history, John Calvin would argue that the only free will human beings had was to reject the offer of salvation.

So should Christians put other people ‘on the spot’? There has been a recent trend away from confrontational evangelism (door-knocking, street-preaching and the like) to relational evangelism. This comes at a far higher personal risk – rejection is harder to take when you actually know the person involved, but perhaps it is a more Biblical method. Christians are called to be ‘witnesses’ (Acts chapter 1 verse 8), living out the faith as an example to unbelievers. This gives people many opportunities to ‘choose life’ and it allows an unforced decision – a positive ‘yes’ rather than a reluctant commitment made out of the fear of hell.

And now, a new feature from freelance theology:
freelance theology’s pre-emptive answer:
‘What does ‘evangelism’ mean?’
It comes from the root word ‘evangel’, which is an Anglicisation (via the Latin) of ‘euangelion’, the Greek word meaning ‘Good News’ (or ‘Gospel’). Euangelistes is a New Testament word meaning ‘one who preaches the good news’ – hence ‘evangelist’.
Not to be confused with: ‘Evangelical’, which has the same root, but means ‘a person who bases their theology on Scripture (the Gospel)’.