The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Enya New Age Music Question

Is Enya "bad"? Is it a sin to listen to her? Thanks.

It's probably not a good idea to listen to Enya. The "New Age" style of music is meant to uplift the emotions of its listeners, to sooth and calm them, and in essence to "open their minds" to "spiritual forces." It is largely tied to New Age spirituality.

I completely agree with you on that Kyle, but I don't believe one should completely cast it out the window.

Just as dating is not in and of itself evil, so too music in and of itelf isn't evil. It's the thought and actions that arise from them which are sinful. There is a fine line between just listening to music, and then heading off in the direction of becoming all sipritualistic. I gave up dating because I don't believe that the baggage that goes along with dating is pleasing to God. I don't believe that it is even possible to date without sinning in some respect. Now I need to read "Boy Meets Girl" by Josh Harris to see how I can court without sinning when the time is right!

I used to do Karate as a kid. There are also connotations associated with Karate. Many people questioned my parents judgement when I was sent to Karate. Because there is a stigma attached to it, people think that it should be discarded completely. The Karate dojo I attended had no spiritual nonsense at all. Same principle applies here

Anyway, to get back on track... I listen to Enya music. I have no problem with it at all. But I do agree with what you say Kyle. My parents have told me that if one can listen to music, and purely enjoy it as a blessing from God, giving Him thanks for the people's talents, then it is a good thing. And I honestly think that especially a Christian can do that. I mean, I am not going to give up walking in my garden and going on nature drives because a group of people have resorted to naturalism. I won't start worshipping trees by relaxing in my garden! Hehe

Sincerely in Him,
Dave

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/nope.gif" alt="" /> Sorry.... but NOTHING is "a-moral"; EVERYTHING is either of itself evil or good. EVERYTHING is either acceptable to God or unacceptable to God. 1) We are not to judge things according to ourselves. Even though a believer may deem eating meat sold in the shackles as "evil", it is in fact "good". 2) It is certainly true that men may and often do take that which is "good" and use it for evil purposes. However, their sinful use of it does not make it "evil in and of itself".

Secondly, it is wrong to categorize all types of music as it they were all the same. Music, in and of itself is certainly not evil. But there are TYPES of music which are inherently evil. Again, the affect that a type of music may have upon different individuals is NOT a valid basis upon which to judge whether it is good or evil. Example.... one may be shot by a bullet and die.. so would you conclude that the individual who shot the bullet is a murderer? But what if that same man shot someone where the bullet penetrated the body and hit a cancerous tumor, destroying it and thus saving the man's life. Would you then conclude that the shooter performed a good deed? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> In short, subjective experience is not necessarily a valid basis to make judgments.

Lastly, I'll add my infamous comparison of syllogisms to show the fallacy in the popular idea that music is "a-moral":

Popular "logic" says:
God created music,
therefore, music is good.
New Age, Rock & Roll, Rap, etc., are all music,
therefore, they are all good.

Using the same "logic", let's substitute something which we KNOW is evil:

Using Popular "logic" #2 says:
God created sex,
therefore sex is good.
Prostitution, homosexuality, child pornography are all sex,
therefore, they are all good.

Point, match, game... !! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Simply put, a) Music is not a-moral, but good because God created it, and b) You cannot dump all types of music into one basket. God created the elements of music, but man is the one who assembles those elements for a particular purpose and expected result. Each type must be carefully scrutinized on its own to find out if it is glorifying OF and TO God and thus be deemed either evil or good. Thereafter one may consider how it affects individuals subjectively and make a judgment as a matter of Adiaphora.

In His Grace,

And just as certain "styles" of dating are inappropriate for Christians to engage in, so certain styles of music are inappropriate for Christians to listen to. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />


I would agree IF musical styles had "no spiritual nonsense at all." However, different styles of music most certainly do have different spiritual/emotional effects inherent to the style of music itself. The combinations rhythm, beat, melody, harmony, etc., can influence a person in good or evil ways. Musical artists know this and often use their abilities to create music that manipulates the emotions and instincts. Thus New Age music is created specifically to calm and uplift a person's emotions and to open them up to spiritual forces; and the music of Barry White was created specifically to arouse lustful passion.

You might want to look at some of the articles on music here: Ecclesiology. See the articles under the heading of "Music".

And just as the person who sacrificed meat to idols was wrong, and the Christian who ate it as meat thanking God for providing food was right, so a musician can create music with sinful motives and a Christian can listen thanking God for his common grace and the derived creativity of his creatures. And then again other Christians will baulk at the meat and the music.

Just as eating the meat does not necessarily turn one, ex operato, into a pagan, so listening to Orinoco Flow does not convert one to New Age mysticism.

In Christ,

James.

I realize that syncretism is a very popular practice and philosophy today among many churches and individuals. The problem is that your comparison, unlike mine, fails to take into account that there are "meats full of poison" being sold in the music shackles of today. Partaking of such infected music can be injurious to one's mind, heart, and soul and in some cases, even fatal. It's only a matter of conscience, aka: Adiaphora when the item under consideration has been deemed "pure and good". Making one's personal preference the basis of choosing what one allows into one's mind is inherently flawed and cannot be defended from Scripture. However, what IS true is that one can learn much about a man by observing those things which he finds desirous and fulfilling in life. (cf. Prov 23:6-8; Matt 24:28)

2 Corinthians 6:14-18 (ASV) "Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship have righteousness and iniquity? or what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what portion hath a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? for we are a temple of the living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore Come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, And touch no unclean thing; And I will receive you, And will be to you a Father, And ye shall be to me sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty."

1 John 2:16 (ASV) "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vain glory of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

Revelation 18:4 (ASV) "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come forth, my people, out of her, that ye have no fellowship with her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues:"

In His Grace,

This is not necessarily addressing the larger issue of Christians and secular music, but I wanted to specifically address the original post asking of Enya was a new ager.

I like Enya; alot. Her best of CD is on our regular play list for dinner time music. I have never considered her new age in that she is promoting a specific new age philosophy.

I remember back in college, when as a new Christian, I was doing the traditional barrel burning of the secular music all fundamentalists encourage their youth to do (I weep at the thought of all the great music I threw out... but I digress) Enya was on the hit list of devil music that would destroy men's souls. I remember hearing that Enya was some sort of "new ager" promoting pantheism or Druidism, and though I secretly liked her music, I always worried of having some wiccan spell cast upon me through the songs. That was until I got my spiritual wits about myself and learned to discern.

One day, however, I saw an interview with her. During the interview, she talked of her Christian faith which sort of stunned me(being Irish, it is more than likely Catholic) and she found it weird that people considered her to be new age, when in fact she has no interest in it. Though many "new age" folks classify her and her music as new age, she doesn't care for the designation and has never considered her music to be "new age." It is more along the lines of traditional Irish and Celtic music. Once I heard that, the burden was lifted and I openly enjoy her music.

According to a wikipedia entry, she comes from an Irish/Celtic musical family that played traditional Irish music. She was once a member of Clannad, which is composed of several of Enya's siblings and other extended family. Unless things have changed, never has her or her family been new agers.

Fred
Hip and Thigh

Dear Jeff,

and how does one determine whether a piece of music is poisoned?

In Christ,

James.

Dear James,

This topic has been discussed nearly to death in the past. Thus I shall not take the time to enumerate all the various ways and standards which music is to be evaluated. One must start with an objective standard from Scripture which demands that music reflect, as should everything we think, say and/or do, the very nature and attributes of God; aka: glorify God. Next we must consider the music itself as to its structure, beat, rhythm, harmony, dissonance, etc., and then consider the subjective results that it can evoke upon men. As has been clearly shown in these type of discussions, the majority of people begin and rarely go beyond the latter from a personal standpoint. People want to argue for "their" favorite music on the basis of what it does for them. All one needs to do is substitute any number of things which we know are sinful using this type of thinking and the error will become apparent.

In His Grace,

ISTM that all music, other than that written by evangelicals must be poisoned by this definition.

On the one hand scripture tells us certains activities are displeasing to God, illicit sex being an example. On the other hand scripture allows us to buy furniture from a Hindu manufacturer. Why the difference? One can be used with the motive of glorifying God, regardless of its origin, the other cannot because God's commands proscribe it.

Your reductio ad absurdam by popular syllogisms falls apart since the premise that "sex is good" cannot be absolutised from scripture. God-honouring sex is good. There is no authentic parallel with music since scripture does not distinguish licit music from illicit music. Scripture may well address the heart motive of the person creating the music but, even if done with a wrong motive, does not condemn the person with the right heart motive listening to the music.

In Christ,

James.

PS My Tamil Christian friends may have a problem since they are only left with Bach to listen to and they find anything not using the pentatonic system cacophonic!

How's that? Secular artists are just as capable of writing a good piece of music as evangelicals, just as they are equally as capable of painting a good work of art. Pilgrim is getting at the music itself, not merely the folks who produce it.

First, I don't disagree with any of the above comments, and I appreciate the insightful and well-thought replies to this post. But this whole argument smells like fundamentalism where one's spiriuality is measured by the music he listens to or avoids.

I'm old enough to remember the debate over whether or not a Christian shoud listen to The Beatles when they first became popular. They, and before them Elvis, only played "the Devil's music".

Now that I am have been liberated from that mind-set thanks to Reformed thought and practice, I can simply enjoy music--any music--without concerning myself with whether or not I'm going to sin by merely listening to it. Of course I'm not going to listen to music that overtly exaults and glorifies Satan or sinful conduct. But I'm no more holy because I avoid it. I've read in some fundy publications that two of my favorite artists, Yanni and Chris Spheeris, are both "New Age" and on the black list. So if I listen to a beautiful composition by Yanni--his CD "Tribute" is superb by the way--I'm going to run out and buy crystals and start chanelling evils spirits? It's just kooky fundamentalism.

One final rant: I would far perfer to listen to an old song by those godless Beatles than "Christian" hip-hop. All of my fellow fiftysomethings say "Amen."

Is one really “no more holy because of avoiding certain music?” What makes us Holy? We are supposed to be “set apart” “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate,” a peculiar people not allowing things that the world allows.
Sin, compromise, and worldliness, creeps in. Ernest Pickering remarks in The Tragedy of Compromise “Men do not start out with the intent of becoming liberals. They arrive at that point after a long journey of compromise.”
Conf. Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares…1st John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us.
Whether it is Wolves in sheep’s clothing or wheat among the tares, our Christian responsibility is to be vigilant and to “earnestly content for the faith”.

You may ask, where do you “draw the line” –as to what music to ok to listen to? Well, why should we be so interested in how close we can get to the edge of a cliff? When we keep trying to get close to that edge we might find ourselves before long in the slippery slope of compromise. The same with the issue of decency and modesty: Why do so many people test the edge of the line? The question should not be, how close can we get; but Is our light is getting dim or is our salt losing its savor? As Robert Shindler (friend of Spurgeon) said: “Our council is- Do not go to near the precipice; you may slip or fall over. Keep where the ground is firm; do not venture on the rotten ice.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
In his grace,
Tracy