When Bad People Make Good Music

Is it OK to listen to music by people who have sinned or are unbelievers?

Today on Facebook, I mentioned several musical artists I enjoy listening to. Audrey Assad has a beautiful collection of hymns and songs. Elevation Worship is energizing and uplifting. Shane & Shane’s rendition of Awesome God is … well … awesome.

Several men promptly chimed in to admonish me.

“Audrey Assad, while quite talented, seems to have abandoned Christianity,” one man said.

“Audrey Assad is openly lesbian,” the other claimed. “Elevation is from Steven Furtick’s church. He has said straight up blasphemous things from the pulpit more times than I can count. The man is a heretic. Shane & Shane are good, but I don’t know about some of their affiliations.”

To be clear, while Audrey Assad has stated that one of her reasons for leaving the Catholic church was their stance on homosexual marriage, that doesn’t mean she’s gay, and I can’t find anything to substantiate this man’s claims.

While I may disagree with Steven Furtick on some theology, I’ve never encountered anything in Elevation Worship’s lyrics that I found problematic, and I have no idea what he meant by Shane & Shane’s “affiliations.” However, I can’t help but recall that time Jesus was judged for affiliating with “tax collectors and sinners.” (Luke 15:1-2)

The Practical Problem

The problem with both these men’s arguments is that everyone is a sinner. We’re all bad people to one degree or another. Everyone has been in the wrong before. Many of us have committed serious sins. And most people aren’t Christians. Are we really going to limit our music, movies, TV, games, and books to those created by Christians? It seems wildly impractical.

But these men go beyond even that. Not only must their music be created by Christians, but Christians who agree with them theologically. The members of Elevation Worship are professing Christians. Shane & Shane are believers. Should we shun their work simply because we disagree on some side-issue like baptism, eschatology, skinny jeans, or hermeneutics?

The first guy added that he wouldn’t recommend listening to Barry Manilow sing Christmas carols either. However, when I pointed out that Martin Luther was antisemitic, and asked whether he’d sing A Mighty Fortress is Our God, he replied, “Absolutely. Luther, a boldly confessing sinner, trusted in Jesus.”

You see, the trouble with legalism (besides being unbiblical) is that it’s not sustainable. You’ve created so many rules that you can’t consistently keep or apply them all, so you’ve got to create loopholes. “This bad person I categorically shun and reject because they lost their faith, but I’ll overlook this bad person’s sin because he loves Jesus and I like that song.”

You’ve got to pick who you’re going to shun, otherwise, you’ll have to shun everyone. These fellows chose to shun everything from homosexuality, divorce, and deconstruction to doctrine they disagree with and “affiliations,” but are apparently unbothered by racism. That’s a problem. It’s also illogical.

The Biblical Problem

They also seem to be unaware of the fate of Solomon. In 1 Kings 11, we read what I personally feel to be one of the saddest accounts in the Bible. “As Solomon grew old,” it says, “his wives turned his heart after other gods … He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the Lord.”

King Solomon, who penned Song of Songs, Proverbs, and several Psalms, apparently died in a state of rebellion against God. He denounced his faith. He participated in religions known for practicing child sacrifice and sexual depravity. Should we still read his books? Should we still sing his Psalms? Does his wisdom still matter?

God thinks so. God has included Solomon’s writings on the pages of Scripture. He has recorded his lyrics for all of time. Solomon’s sin does not negate God’s truth. Solomon’s failures do not invalidate the work God did through him.

While Audrey Assad – and even staunch Christian artists like Skillet or Demon Hunter – didn’t write the Bible, the same principle applies. When they speak truth, it is truth. When they create beauty, it is beauty. When they do good, it is good. When they sin, it is sin.

But if the very stones can cry out and worship Jesus, so can Audrey. We have a Savior who seeks out his lost lambs. He leaves the 99 and pursues us through spiritual wilds and wastelands. I have great hope that God will seek her out again, and that she and Solomon will find healing and peace in Heaven.

The Theological Argument

In an episode of the British sit-com, IT Crowd, Jen asks, “Cradle of Filth? I presume that's a band. It's not literally a cradle of filth?”

“Oh, no!” Richmond replies in shock. “That would be horrible!”

Philosophically, the Apostle Paul agrees. In 1 Corinthians 8, Paul makes the argument that it is not sinful to eat meat that was sacrificed to idols. He points out that, “Even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth … yet for us there is but one God … through whom all things came and through whom we live … [so] we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.”

The same concept applies to music. If a musical artist worships a god that is not real, that god cannot harm you. It is not real. You’re not participating in idolatry, because you don’t believe their god is real. That artist’s choices and mistakes do not somehow transfer to you by association. You’re not going to deconstruct from listening to Audrey, and listening to Barry Manilow won’t make you gay. That’s simply not how these things work.

Just as Paul could eat a flat-iron steak grilled for the glory of Gorignak – knowing that Gorignak is not real and that a steak is a steak and that God created cows for his own glory – so you and I can listen to Audrey’s songs knowing that the hymns she sings remain true to this day, and that God is the creator of both her and of music. Any goodness or beauty she creates is a fraction of his invention. When we admire her music and the truths she sings, we are admiring the work of God through her.

However, Paul does caution us, saying, “Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.”

In the same way, some people may be so accustomed to the occult that they can’t watch Harry Potter without thinking about actual witchcraft. Some may be so weak in their faith that when they hear compelling music by an unbeliever, their faith feels shaken. Some may be so tempted by sexual sin that they can’t watch a movie featuring an actor known for carnality.

But we must never conflate weakness with virtue. Those with weaknesses should be cautious, but they should not imagine that they are stronger Christians because they are more easily tempted. Quite the opposite. Their conscience is weak, and this makes them more vulnerable to sin.

For those of us untroubled by such weakness, Paul continues, “Be careful that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak.”

I have a right to listen to Audrey Assad, and I can listen to her without fear or guilt. I can also listen to Ghost without becoming a pot-smoking Satanist. I can listen to Barry Manilow without developing frosted tips. If I play Cradle of Filth, there won’t be a literal cradle of filth in my house. I can even listen to Marilyn Manson without fixating on his alleged crimes, although, I find most of his music obnoxious, and I can’t enjoy songs that mock Jesus or glamorize sin.

And this is where we find the hard line, isn’t it? While there is nothing wrong with listening to music by unbelievers (let alone Christians we disagree with) we should be concerned and offended by music that promotes evil. There is an Avenged Sevenfold song I skip because it’s about rape. There are Tori Amos tracks I can’t enjoy because they’re too weird and gratuitous. There are Ghost songs I find blasphemous and don’t listen to. Nevertheless, these artist’s flaws aren’t going to become my flaws. Their identity doesn’t become my identity. Their choices and lifestyles and affiliations are not mine. It is not sinful to listen to good music, regardless of who wrote or performed it.

Nevertheless, if we know that such music unsettles the faith of a brother or sister, we can avoid listening to it in their presence. Just as we would avoid drinking beer in front of a recovering alcoholic, we can abstain from our rights for the sake of others. They should not seek to control or shame us, but we need not aggravate their conscience either.

I hope these thoughts are helpful to you, and I’d love to hear yours in the comments!

Thanks,

Jenn

PS: Big kudos if you understood the Gorignak reference.