I don’t have legalism. That should explain things

   Many of you probably noticed that I have referred to secular songs multiple times in my posts. The reason why I can be a professing Christian and listen to and/or refer to secular songs is because I do not have the heresy of legalism. Others who adhere to legalism have been trying to say (wrongfully so) that believers in Christ are not ever allowed to listen to any “secular music.” That would be incorrect as speaking too simply and drawing a hard and fast boundary line for everyone where no hard and fast boundary exists.

   If you want to know what legalism is, I am providing a few links here to explain it- https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-Christian-legalism.html    

https://carm.org/what-is-legalism  Legalism (when it occurs in the church) is basically (typically) the erroneous belief system which states that a person’s salvation depends on the continual adherence to rules of conduct and behavior (either to attain or maintain salvation). Such a belief system entails an improper use and view of the Law, when in actuality the salvation of God is by grace through faith. "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast" (Ephesians 2:8). I don’t hold to antinomianism. I don’t hold to sinless perfectionism as doctrine either.

   In regards specifically to secular music, there is no commandment in the scriptures against any specific style of music. Obviously music that expresses Christian principles in general (such as love, forgiveness, mercy, holiness, worshipping God, and anything along those lines) is to be preferred over those songs that promote a sinful lifestyle and the work of the devil. Not only that, but also Philippians 4:8 reminds us that "whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence, and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things." Secular songs which can meet that high of a standard for excellence in thought and virtue are obviously fine (i.e. they meet the standard of Philippians 4:8). Songs that have Christian principles can be found in the secular categories as well as the sacred. A whole book could be written on the issue, and so I am just giving a quick post to explain myself. Not all music has to be worship music, just as not all books have to be “inspirational” (about faith) or theological. Music is a mode of expression and communication. For example, no one expects all conversations to be about faith only, so why do some expect music to be as such? These people have legalism as their faith in practice, and it simply consists of propagating doctrines of men, not commands of God. In Matthew 15:3 Jesus said the Pharisees and scribes, "Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" Quoting Isaiah He said, "But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men" (Matthew 15:9).
   There are songs by groups that seem patently pagan, for example, that articulate concepts which are difficult to explain and are explained nowhere else. Some songs by those types of groups even have the Word of God in minute or discreet instances. “Viva La Vida” by the band Coldplay is one example for having in the lyrics a rough quote of Genesis 15:1. If we remember the great example of evangelism in Acts 17, we know the pagans unwittingly have things that testify to the true God, and those can be used in our witness. Paul even goes so far as to quote pagan poetry in Acts 17:28 in order to make his point, and that is an example what I am trying to say is possible in witnessing. (the work quoted, by the way, is Aratus's Phenomena).

   There’s a point at which secular music could be sin if it is idolatry for a person. Idolatry is forbidden in the commands of God for it being in the moral laws of the Ten Commandments. Secular music is not expressly forbidden. There is much to say from the Scriptures that people should be often prayerful and worshipful. However, I don’t anywhere see a binding command against any style of music. “All things are lawful, not all things are profitable” (1 Corinthians 6:12; 10:23). While many more things in the world might be permissible for the believer than some think, many things are actually folly and unwise to partake in.

   I would say probably that some of the best secular artists are Christians. For example, Bono from U2, Carrie Underwood, Katy Perry, Bob Dylan, and Amy Grant are all well-known pop singers who are Christian in their personal faith/beliefs.
   On the other hand, believers are not to be judging another for the specific things that some have to avoid or abstain from in order to not be stumbled and stand strong in the faith. Romans chapter 14 makes mention of this idea as "principles of conscience," taking as an example a church member who would only eat vegetables. Indeed, the Lord Jesus had taught by analogies in the sermon on the mount that if something stumbles one that they out to get rid of it (paraphrasing Matthew 5:29-30). My whole point is that the guidelines for what one may keep in their life and what one should discard are according to biblical principles, not hard and fast rules made up by men to govern over each other with. If there's a brother or sister in the faith weaker than me when it comes to music and must never listen to any secular songs, I cannot really judge him or her for it. Nor should he or she try to place the same yoke on me or judge me by the same rule if the content does not stumble me or hinder my walk. There are things that I too must avoid typically to stay strong in the faith where the rule is not specifically penned in the Bible. In those things it is a Romans 14 issue and people can have vastly different weak points where what is kryptonite for one person is completely not a problem for another.
   With all that said, the principles of conscience of Romans 14 have to be understood together with the underlying proviso that there is no system of holy observance that is part of the package of requirements for salvation (by abstaining, observing, or adhering to rules of conduct). That salvific doctrinal point would seem to account for the difference in Paul's opinion between Galatians 4 and Romans 14. That the Galatians had made strict observances a requirement for salvation is why Paul felt he had labored over them in vain (Galatians 4:11), whereas the church in Rome needed different instruction for not having same legalistic heresy.
   To wrap up my short discussion here I will leave a quote from the apostle Paul in Colossians 2:20-23.
    "If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as "do not handle, do not taste, do not touch! (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)- in accordance to the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence."