« The MicroChurch Movement | Main | You Could Be A Star! (Well, not really. But...) »
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Organ replaced with Guitars... Oh My!!!
I grew up as a conservative, separatist Baptist. (Yes, I survived.) We didn't fellowship with any other church in town. Actually, there was only one other church that we acknowledged that existed (and we really didn't care for them very much). We didn't even play basketball with other churches. We didn't 'smoke, chew, or run with girls who do'. So I feel that I kind of understand the separatist mindset. It goes a little something like this:
If we can't agree on everything; then we agree on nothing.
Everything was very judgmental and legalistic toward the end of the church I grew up in (yes, they were killed off by legalism while I was off in college). The issues: hair length; card playing; sending kids to public school... you name it; they had a problem with it. If you didn't keep the list; you were 'in sin' and don't even think about hangin' with anybody who broke the rules.
It seems there aren't as many separatists today as there once were (although I think most of them blog!)... but the movement is still alive and well. Here is a great example...
You can find the link to the following here... (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, fbns@wayoflife.org, http://www.wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143):
The October 29 issue of the Chattanooga Times Free Press (Chattanooga, Tennessee) featured a picture of Tennessee Temple University students worshipping to contemporary rock music during a Wednesday evening service. The accompanying article said:
"Beneath the 90-year-old stained glass at St. Andrews Center, rock music blares as worshippers in jeans and T-shirts fill the sanctuary. The weekly Wednesday night church service has all the markings of traditional worship--music, preaching and praying. But the choir and organ have been replaced with drums and an electric guitar. 'Each generation has different styles of music, and what churches have to realize is that we've got to meet those younger generations' needs,' said Dr. Danny Lovett, who preaches at the service and is president of Tennessee Temple University."
Where does the Bible say God's people should use the world's style of music? To the contrary, we are instructed to have spiritual music (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), which means music that is set apart unto God from this wicked world. See 1 Jn. 2:15-17; Jam. 4:4; Tit. 2:11-14; Rom. 12:2. While it is a sad thing for older graduates of this school to observe, it is not surprising to see Tennessee Temple and Highland Park Baptist Church take such a dramatic turn to a worldly philosophy. Lovett recently came to Temple from Jerry Falwell's Liberty Baptist University, and it is New Evangelical to the core. Billy Graham, the Prince of New Evangelicalism, has spoken at Liberty and has been praised by Falwell for his 'faithful ministry.' Liberty students are not warned about the heresy of Graham's ecumenical evangelism or of his unscriptural emphasize the positive, judge not philosophy. Liberty has hosted conferences for the radically ecumenical Promise Keepers as well as for Rick Warren. Biblical separation is rapidly fading from the agenda of a large body of former fundamentalist Baptists who are moving in the popular contemporary direction.
---
My goodness... take out the organ and put in a guitar (by the way, there were many stringed instruments in the Bible); and suddenly we crossed the line from spiritual to unspiritual; from Godly to ungodly.
But here's the problem... someone is determining what music is spiritual and which music is unspiritual... which music is godly and which is ungodly.
The songs song 20 years ago at Tennessee Temple University (when the school was 'godly') were not written in Bible times. They were new at one time (just like the songs they sing now).
The electronic and/or pipe organ is not a biblical new testament instrument. If anything, guitars are closer to the 'original'. But many churches viewed the organ as 'ungodly' when it was introduced. There are churches still today who don't use any musical instruments. Again, someone has made the choice.
But since The Beatles and other 'rock' musicians use guitars; guitars are worldy. Who made that decision?
I don't hear anyone saying that we shouldn't use pianos in worship because Liberace was gay.
Or that we shouldn't wear ties to church because the worldy business community also wear ties to conduct their secular drugery.
But here's the main thing I noticed when I was a part of a separatist church... the church tended to concentrate on the negative... and once it started on one thing, it lead to a list of other evils (all of which the church had something against). That's what intrigued me about the above quote. All that it took for him to go off was that the organ was replaced by a guitar. This lead to all of the following...
--this all happened because the leader came from Liberty
--Libery is NeoEvangelical
--Billy Graham has spoken at Liberty
--Billy Graham is a heretic (and the Prince of New Evangelicalism, btw)
--Liberty students 'haven't been warned'
--They've worked with Promise Keepers and Rick Warren (it ALWAYS comes back to him, doesn't it?)
--Few are left but us... even the fundamentalists are moving in the 'popular contemporary direction'
How'd he get all that from one newspaper article?
I guess you'd have to have grown up a separatist to understand that one. (And I think I do).
It's sad... but I think I do.
Any thoughts? Any separatists among us? Welcome, from a former separatist! :)
Todd
Add Your Comments and Ideas now...Pass this post on to a friend now...
Subscribe to RSS Feed | Get Email Notifications on New Posts
November 29, 2005 in For What It's Worth | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/131723/3759542
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Organ replaced with Guitars... Oh My!!!:
Comments
Todd,
I did't grow up believing that way, but I experienced that doctrine as a kid. Most of my friends and the Christian school I attended carried those beliefs. I completely understand that kind of bondage. However, that's not what scares me the most today. What scares me the most is that churches have removed their "Legalistic Ways" and yet still remain in bondage. I've seen churches that have drifted away from those old ties and have carried other traditions that still give the same results; hurt individuals and clickish communities. Exclusivity has destroyed most ministries where I live. Its one thing to believe that salvation is the only way to Heaven but a group of believers that are self consumed are no different than the legalistic teachers of old. We may look different and our music may sound contemporary, but our harmful methods are still present. I'm sure that most separtist would hold true to the belief system of "that's they way we've always done it." After all, that's what makes them separate. By that I don't mean that traditions are bad. In fact, it is my opinion that traditions are a good thing when not taught as doctrine and always put in check with Scripture. However, that's the problem. We are still struggling with being exclusive. Rural communities as I have said on more than one occasion are especially hurting in this catagory. To accept the stranger is to deny the very life we have worked so hard to protect. What are we protecting really? Is it eternal or temporary? The answer is right in front of us but to accomplish such a task takes a people willing to admit their faults. We all have them and the sooner we admit it the sooner we can get rid of it(the legalism I mean). Just a thought. God bless.
Posted by: Pete King | Nov 29, 2005 4:30:15 PM
Oh my! I don't read anywhere in the Bible that Jesus separted himself from people. Jesus ate and drank with sinners. I thought we were suppose to live like Jesus.
Posted by: Kevin | Nov 29, 2005 4:34:58 PM
Todd:
I too grew up in a separatist environment and second everything you say. When I attended a major Christian University I was honestly shocked that there were believers from denominations other than our separatist association. I thank God that since then I have gone back and re-read the New Testament with open eyes and mind. I strongly believe that we need to follow Jesus' example and behave as "friends of sinners."
Bill
Posted by: Bill | Nov 29, 2005 4:48:49 PM
Pete, you have some very penetrating thoughts. Ones that parallel my experience. I was in a growing, vibrant (tended toward legalism, but the Spirit revailed most of the time)church with a firey vision. We lost the present pastor and acquired a new one who foster the "old" ways, however, he was young. The church presently, in my perspective, is dead and dieing. The attenders know it, but the leaders still affirm a "healthy" atmosphere. They have the contemporary music, they even have a new worship leader (who replaced me) who is even more talented than I, with a great heart, wonderful person. BUT! I question how long he will last. How soon will he face the "...get in line", "stuff your convictions", no time for "spirit-filled" worship, we need to cut your heart rendering prayers. They really haven't changed a bit. In fact they went further and further into there own type of legalism and separatist ways. The issues weren't the music, choir or organ, it was all about the heart. You can put a new coat of paint, slogans, and even a cafe in the mix, but underneath its the same "control" driven leagistic folks running the show.
And really legaism is nothing more than a guise for fear and insecurity of facing a terrifying world armed only with your faith and trust in the Lord and equipped with the gifts of the Spirit. Facing the world with only "faith" scares most legaistic, religious spirit folks to death.
Posted by: Ziessler | Nov 29, 2005 6:03:46 PM
I like what has been already said. Let me just add a few thoughts from my experience. I grew up in a small church right down the street from where Calvary Chapel started. While Chuck Smith was baptizing thousands of young people and equipping a new generation, my small church sat in their smugness of being the “right” kind of Christian. It wasn’t until my early teens that the God led our church in a New direction, under new leadership that wasn’t afraid of the world, but rather wanted to see the world saved. God began a new work and the church grew and people came to know Christ. I look back on my two experiences and thank God he allowed me to experience what it is not to be serving him effectively and to serve him effectively.
I understand the “legalist” way, because it is at it’s foundation an “easy way.” Easy in the sense that one never has to grow, stretch or increase their faith for anything. Don’t let the title “legalist” however just apply to the “bun in the hair” type of Christian, there are plenty of legalist in the church today, and they just might be the ones without ties and wearing shorts! Like one has already said, if the heart doesn’t change, legalism will always be with us.
Blessings,
Pastor Al
Posted by: Pastor Al | Nov 29, 2005 6:59:11 PM
"I don't hear anyone saying that we shouldn't use pianos in worship because Liberace was gay.
Or that we shouldn't wear ties to church because the worldy business community also wear ties to conduct their secular drugery."
Yes! I've made those very points numerous times.
Why can we play "Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee," the music of which was written by Beethoven (not a Christian, and not written as a hymn...), but just watch out if Petra or Third Day come to town!
I think many Christians would prefer an album of hymns played by Liberace to a Third Day CD. Sad, but true.
I've also wondered why it's not okay to dress casually for church, but it's okay to dress like worldly mob bosses when they order a hit or corrupt Enron executives?
Oh well...
Here's the question for which I've never received a satisfactory answer: what is the Biblical definition of "worldly," how do you come to it, and how do you apply it consistently?
Brian
Posted by: Brian La Croix | Nov 29, 2005 7:34:49 PM
Interesting how music is even an issue. It is hardly emphasized or even mentioned in the NT. It really has little value in someone's Chrstian walk. It's an issue and shouldn't be.
Posted by: jhy | Nov 29, 2005 7:57:21 PM
Brian,
That's exactly my point. Some person is deciding what is worldly and what is not.
It would be one thing if the Bible said that worldly meant 'electric guitars' and 'contemporary music' or 'suit and tie'. But it doesn't.
Then some men step in and define what worldy is. And then tell everyone else to subscribe to their standard. If you don't meet it, then you're worldly (translated, unbiblical, unholy, heretic, apostate, heathen).
But they don't get it: man is drawing the line; and man is subject to extreme failure more time than not.
Bam. Legalism.
There has to be balance (that seems to be my mantra the past couple weeks)...
Music is a super example. What is 'spiritual music' according to Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 looks different to me than it does to the writer above.
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 29, 2005 8:02:22 PM
jhy,
I completely disagree. In the Psalms alone there are numerous examples of music and singing and new songs being sung and called for as expressions of worship and praise!
As a Christian, I see, hear, sing and play music and it's a major part (emphasis on PART) of my Christian "walk."
To me, it's one of God's most wonderful gifts!
I do believe music can be abused and misused in the church. More often than not, it's the narrow minded view that causes so much trouble.
Ben E
Posted by: Ben E | Nov 29, 2005 9:34:45 PM
I agree Ben E.
Music may hardly emphasized or even mentioned in the NT but there are many things not listed in the NT that numerous churches preach and insist on in our modern churches. FOr example, some believe wearing jeans is immoral but the NT does not tell us that! Another example, I have never read anywhere in the NT where people cannot have purple hair.... so, what exactly does that mean??
Posted by: Ivana | Nov 29, 2005 9:50:53 PM
OK...I'll bite..."Drugs, Sex and Rock-n-Roll"--They go together as expressions of our culture's rebellion against God. Rock-n-Roll IS worldly...is there any arguement about that? By worldly I specifically mean that it is the world's prefered mode of musical expression for its rebellion against God. Yes, I realize that I am inviting a history lesson on how "Amazing Grace" was sung to a bar tune...etc....yet I maintain that because Rock-n-Roll is synonymous with rebellion it (the style itself)carries with it a message/attitude/"spirit" of rebellion. What is wrong with making a distinction between how the world worships its gods and how we worship our True, Living and Holy God? If that makes me a "seperatist", so be it!
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 29, 2005 10:39:00 PM
Hello to all my recovering Pharisee Brothers and Sisters,
Yep Todd, I too grew up extremely “Fundie” (We were the ones that put the Fun in Fundamentalist). I was KJV only and all of the rest until I went to Liberty University (it is amazing how much flack I have gotten from my Fundie brethren over that), there I learned how to separate what was social preferences from Biblical standards
It was also at Liberty that I met Danny Lovett who came on staff as I was finishing my undergraduate studies at LU. Let me say that Danny is an acquired taste, and that not everyone warms up to him at the same speed. My wife and I were a little shocked when Ten. Temple called him, but we both assumed that they were looking for him to come be the lightning rod for the changes that they needed to make (I guess that happened).
As to the usual canned response from the ultra-fundie camp, I too understand were they are coming from. I know for myself, that my motivation was never to be a jerk or to have an easy way out of the Christian life, actually to the contrary; I was convinced I needed to “contend for the faith” and to “fight the good fight” “wrestling against, principalities and powers, against spiritual darkness in high places”. In other words I was a Pharisee who was scared to death that if I (or if I allowed others) did not keep the faith pure that it would destroy the church and it would lead others to hell, all because I did keep the highest standards possible. I knew how to worship in truth (just like Jesus says of the Jews at the Samaritan well) I had just missed the worshipping in spirit part (truth that doesn’t bring freedom is not truth, it is only half truth.)
So what changed me and my ways? When I took Romans and heard my professor expound on how the weaker brother in Romans is the legalist, and I learned that the Holy Spirit is a lot more powerful than my failings (sooo the same Spirit that convicts me of sin can do the same for others to without me issuing them a rule book? Hmm who’d have thunk it).
So while we sometimes stand back and shake our heads at our brethrens actions, let’s remember that if not for the grace of Christ and the growth produced by the Spirit in our lives we would be with them. Remember, Paul was once one of us too, before he was transformed by grace!
Posted by: Chris Rhodes | Nov 29, 2005 10:51:05 PM
When my skirt was too short (above the 1 &1/2 inches from the ground when kneeling) the principal ripped my hem out. Walking around like that taught me humility. It helped me understand grace to love others who had stupid regulations. When I left to attend public school to be a missionary and my salvation was questioned, I learned to look past those who have narrow views. Now when I quote scripture or hold to a standard at my "contemp" church I am called legalistic. Go figure!
Todd, I am unable to respond to your guest "bloggers" connection. Please contact me at enchantedbarn@netzero.net Thanks.
Posted by: liz | Nov 29, 2005 10:51:30 PM
pdl,
my response would be, ok... that's where you draw the line. To you, Rock n Roll is 'synonymous with rebellion'. I assume you grew up in the 60s and saw all that rebellion first-hand. It resonates with you. You can't separate the two. That's fine.
I'm probably a tad bit younger than you; but Rock n Roll is NOT synonymous with rebellion to me. It never has been. And I don't think that many people my age associate it with rebellion.
Might I suggest that if you were around when "Amazing Grace" or whatever was introduced from a bar; and if you were saved out of alcoholism, that you wouldn't be able to separate the two either. But you didn't live then; and you now love Amazing Grace (a great song, by the way).
All this is fine... what disgruntles me is when the people who draw the line in one place condemn others who draw the line in another. That's my problem when things get out of hand at this blog... it's from people drawing a line on a non-biblical issue; and try to make it a biblical issue for others.
Now before you think I'm going all liberal on you... I'm not. I'm very firm on the things the Bible takes a clear stand on.
In my 'separatist' days, we called them standards. The 'standards' were the rules we kept. Convictions, on the other hand, were what we would die for.
I guess what I'm saying is I don't like it when people make their 'standards' into my 'convictions'.
It's late... I hope that makes some sense. :)
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 29, 2005 11:12:53 PM
I will jump in here!
I believe as stated earlier that since Jesus was a friend of sinners, we should be as well; so, I will love the separatists, because I have to. Hey, they have their law and now they really need Jesus; it seems to be a biblical pattern. That whole "live and die by" it stuff.
I love the “sex, drugs and rock and roll” comment. (Insert favorite saying from Napoleon Dynamite here _______________) I think the CHURCH must be careful in how it defines what worship is because most people reading this blog would have a hard time worshipping in an Indonesian, East Indian or other ethnic style, especially with their music, (personal experience). Cultural Context People! I think the church should be more focused on the fact that when we read Romans 1 there is a big list for people who have sold out with the darkest impulses and that…
29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed(XBOX 360) and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife(not found in legalistic churches), deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil(download music); they disobey their parents(and break curfew); 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.(sounds likes preachers kids) 32Although they know God's righteous decree(sounds like them separatist fellas) that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Notice that gossip is between murders and God haters…ouch, nothing much about music though or style thereof. There are much more serious things that the CHURCH must clean up don’t you think?
Don't shoot me because I used NIV!
Posted by: soulpastor | Nov 29, 2005 11:32:41 PM
pdl,
I would agree that SOME churches have taken it "over the line" with SOME music.
Often I find it has to do with the maturity level or cultural situation of the believer. There are some bonifide "rock" songs that have Christian oriented lyrics that move my heart deeply. Some bring deep conviction others lift my passion for Christ and His mission in & for me.
These songs are personal to me yet, as a worship leader, I wouldn't use them publicly (in the worship service) without carefully considering the context or those recieving it.
Music is a powerful "substance." And, like many things God has given us, can be use to inform, inspire and draw us to closer to God. And, it can also be abused and be a sound track for rebellion. Scripture is a gift with many wonderful, great and glorious purposes yet, in the hands (or mouths) of some, it can be used to divide, mis-inform and drive people away.
To me, the most crazy thing is how blind people on either side of the issue can be.
I took part in a community wide Thanksgiving service last week. The "featured" pastor jumped, screamed (literally SCREAMED!) hollered and ran about the platform like some crazed man! People from his church supplied the "special" music which was all Southern Gospel with drums, lead guitars, bass, the WORKS! There was even some soul in one of the songs yet, I'd bet you anything he'd the first use scripture to judge & condem the "sex, drug & rockn' roll" crowd for acting THE SAME WAY. I just had to marvel at it all and go eat some turkey.
Good Night
Ben E
Posted by: Ben E | Nov 30, 2005 12:18:13 AM
I attended Tennessee Temple, great school great church reached many ppl for Christ but I am so glad to see them losen up!!! It was so bad there one time my father who was in seminary waited 21 min to get into the book store when he got to the door they would not let him because he had just a little hair over the back of his ear(he also pastered one of thier chapels), my sister could not wear pants because she was a cheerleader, I did not see my firs movie untill I was 16, it was so stupid it was funny. Again they reached many ppl started many churchs just had to many rules and people who liked the rules more than ppl.
Glad to see them realzing that, I know some churchs that think they are going liberal
not true I think they are just trying to be relevant. We all have to be careful or we can beome just like just on the other side of the coin, hey if a church is doing that and its working for them and they are reaching ppl let em get after it thats why baskin robbins has 31flavors
Posted by: bwa | Nov 30, 2005 12:31:55 AM
I remember a simple lesson in theology class about convictions, pursuasions, and opinions. The good Dr. Scholes helped students develop a sense of what is vital to our faith and what adds to our never ending debate in Chistendom.
Keep our convictions to the essentials(We need not add much to the apostle's creed). Our useless arguments that Paul warned his young apprentice Timothy abound daily. We think much to highly of our pursuasions and opinions.
Jesus, Paul, and Peter irritated well intended religious folks in thier attempt to impact eternity. We should seek to join their company. It reinvigorates our faith.
Posted by: Aaron | Nov 30, 2005 12:47:53 AM
Just do it man, just do it....
The last time I read the Psalms I believe David worshipped God with raised hands, clanging cymbals, and dancing. If it is sin I the worst because I play the guitar.
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Nov 30, 2005 9:23:12 AM
Good morning all...Todd,
I agree with your statements on convictions etc... however, my case against Rock-n-Roll as a style linked too closely to be ignored with the rebellion of our culture against God is not an opinion that I formed from personal experience (although I was born in the 60's) The roots of Rock-n-Roll are historically entirely drawn from satanic/immoral/philosophical rebellion against God and the fruits of it as an expression of rebellion are dropping like rotten figs all around us. WOW! I know what I am talking about! Study the history of Rock-n-Roll with a open mind and an open Bible and you will see that Rock is really the design of the Devil intended specifically to bind the minds/emotions/spirits of its devotees to doctrines of satan, immoral practices and specific rebellion against Jesus Christ. Space is limited here--but, I assure you I could fill this blogh with statement after statement of rockers who have stated it more clearly that I could ever do. We can ignore the facts of this special dispensation (style) of satan wrapped in confusion. Or we can look at it critically and ask God if "rockin" the church house meets HIS STANDARDS of holiness in worship.
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 9:58:07 AM
pdl,
I respect what you think, but I disagree.
David 'rocked the house' if you will. Probably in a way that we've never seen or come close to experiencing.
He danced naked in the street. Looked so stupid that his wife accused him of being a skank.
Old testament worship was loud. trumpets, drums, strings.
As a musician, notes are notes; and instruments are instruments. And I don't subscribe that there are any moral equivilants based on the way the notes and/or instruments are arranged.
I had a pastor in college say that rock music was evil because the 2nd beat of the measure was emphasized instead of the 1st beat (as God intended). Poppycock.
I respect you opinion, pdl... but respecfuly disagree.
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 30, 2005 10:13:18 AM
Pdl, I just wanted you know that I understand where you coming from. I felt the same way a few years ago until I met my wife. When I met her she listened to Michael W. Smith. I didn't like it at first but I listened to it because she enjoyed it and I listened to it with an open mind. Now I am 40 yrs. old and I grew up in the 80's. Now I love this type of music. I will say though, there are a few out there that you have to question.
Like for instance, Gospel music never use to be popular. You had a few who use to sing it leave and went to country music. Now they have come back to gospel. Why? Because that is where the money is. I disagree with this.. But you take people like Jeremy Camp, Michael, Casting Crowns and many more, who have a mission for the Lord and alot of young people are coming to Christ. Sat. Night Casting Crowns and bldg. 429 where here in concert. There were about 200-300 people who where saved. Some of them where 6- 60 yrs. of age... To be honest with you I like jazz, classical, old country music, 50,60, 80's, Gospel and Contemporay. If I ask you something would you do it for me... Buy you Michael W. Smiths Vol. 1&2 of praise music, and just set back and listen with an open mind and open heart...
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Nov 30, 2005 10:32:23 AM
Mudsic is spiritual in that it somehow connects with our innermost being, but music in and of itself is not evil or good. I went through music appreciation as a College and Seminary student, and if you just listen to music without lyrics it paints whatever picture you have in your spirit at the time. Figure skaters can perform "Amazing Grace" but without the lyrics it is just a pretty tune.
About legalism - its like when David was going to fight Goliath and Saul gave him his armor to wear - it didn't fit. We are in a different battle, we need new strategies, David still fought in the power of the LORD, but with different tools.
Posted by: drbob | Nov 30, 2005 10:49:08 AM
Todd,
So by illustration what you are saying to me is...because David "danced naked in the street" it is ok for us to, with full knowledge, adopt a style of "worship" that is the default expression of Satan's rebellion in our culture?
BTW--He wasn't naked...he wore a priestly linen ephod (2Sam.6:16) and a robe (1Chron.15:27).
Also, I am not against spontaneous, enthusiastic worship driven by the Holy Spirit...this is what David did--with all his might! Somehow, I see that expression completely disconnected from the image of David "rockin' the house" gyrating naked to some CCM jam session.
Questions:
Is Rock-n-Roll THE preferred music of this culture's expression of rebellion against God?
Are the roots of Rock-n-Roll (objectively/historically/currently) in satanism/immorality/rebellion specifically directed against Jesus Christ?
Is style part of the substance of music?
If these questions are answered "yes"--why do we assume that God is ok with it as a form of worship unto Him?
I believe we make that assumption because we like it and it fits well into our man-centered designs regarding how we want to "do church".
Todd, have you ever taken time with a clear mind before God asked Him if it is ok with Him to allow Rock-n-Roll to drive the form of worship in your church?
I have (and I was leader of a Rock-centered youth worship band)and I heard what I did not want to hear.
I am no Quaker! Our church gets loud--sometimes spontaneous--often enthusiastic. We have a "worship team" complete with singers, acustic guitar, electric base, wind instruments, violins, piano, keyboard and YES--Congas! Yet, we have philosophically made a decision to not do Ronk-n-Roll for the reasons that I have already stated. BTW--we also .ppt our worship up on the big screen. I am not against technology and contemporary instrumentation--but Rock-n-Roll has a message in the style itself that is not compatible with worship of Jesus Christ.
I know we disagree, but please answer the questions I posed above--how do you get around the objective nature of Rock's satanic connection and the implications I raised in my questions? I don't mean to be arguementitive, I am just so convinced that Rock is against God and that it is a "Trojan Horse" of Satan's warring against the Church in this age/culture.
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 11:30:10 AM
My son is a classically trained musician and awesome vocalist (he sings with the Chicago Symphony Chorus).
I love what he says about organs and organ music. "Dad, an organ is a synthesizer . . . a really bad synthesizer."
I thought you'd get a kick out of that
Posted by: pjlr | Nov 30, 2005 11:37:57 AM
pdl
I think you have missed Todd and other's point that, even if you are right in your assumption that rock came about out of rebellion against God, that it is STILL an invention of man. So what if that's how it started. That doesn't make it inherently evil. There is no biblical mandate on how we are to worship God. Wouldn't Paul go off on that like he did the Galatians? How in the world can you call it evil when it has been bringing people closer to God in worship settings than old hymns have in 50 years? (Not a knock on hymns. they rule)
So yeah, a few people "invented" rock out of rebellion. But a lot of other people have used it to glorify God and to facilitate a worship experience that has attracted thousands of people to hear the good news. In fact, it played a crucial role in my salvation. To hear you call it evil hits a sore nerve. You may not want to use rock music in your church. That's fine.
But God is using it to reach unsaved people like I once was.
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 11:42:13 AM
pdl,
I think Matt pretty much sums up my thoughts and answers to your questions...
1. Is Rock-n-Roll THE preferred music of this culture's expression of rebellion against God?
Although I think it's the preferred style of Americans, I don't think most Americans view RR as an expression of rebellion against God.
2. Are the roots of Rock-n-Roll (objectively/historically/currently) in satanism/immorality/rebellion specifically directed against Jesus Christ?
To be honest, any new style of music over the years have been categorized as rebellion over the years. RR is no different. Before RR, there were dance halls where young people rebelled with great orchestras.
3. Is style part of the substance of music?
I think music and style is amoral and can be used for good and/or evil purposes regardless of style.
4. If these questions are answered "yes"--why do we assume that God is ok with it as a form of worship unto Him?
I believe my answers were no. :)
5. Todd, have you ever taken time with a clear mind before God asked Him if it is ok with Him to allow Rock-n-Roll to drive the form of worship in your church?
Yep, as a musician; probably more time than most, actually.
You said, "Yet, we have philosophically made a decision to not do Ronk-n-Roll for the reasons that I have already stated."
Again, that's your line, and I think that's great.
BTW... you use congas? Wow. I really question that. You know that the African tribes use congas while they sacrifice babies to idols don't you?
:) [Todd smiles]
(when was the last time you heard the "african tribe" beat argument against rock music? now THAT brings back memories).
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 30, 2005 12:00:21 PM
Matt,
[Is Rock-n-Roll THE preferred music of this culture's expression of rebellion against God?
Are the roots of Rock-n-Roll (objectively/historically/currently) in satanism/immorality/rebellion specifically directed against Jesus Christ?
Is style part of the substance of music?]
I think your answer to these was basically:
'Yes--but so what?'
Pragmatically speaking, you are right to say that Rock-n-Roll is impacticng a lot of people in and outside of the Church.
However, the subtle message that comes in with the adapatation of Rock is: 'You know what you disciples of Christ, seperation from worldliness is really a second-tier issue to God in the Church. And you folks who are lost in "drugs, sex and rock-n-roll...don't worry about it, God is just like you---He even enjoy's the same music...come on in and have a good time...we'lll talk about the cross you are to bear later after we have entertained you into the Kingdom.
Matt, rock-n-roll is not working...I saw more kids dragged off and enticed by the spirit behind "christian rock" into worldliness and spiritual failure that I ever did "saved" through rock-n-roll in my years working as a youth pastor. In fact, in my years working with Tenn Challenge as a counsellor I saw more "church kids and pastor's sons" come through our doors that you could ever imagine. A common link to their backsliding was the cross-over effect that much of CCM has created among the youth of our churches...crossing over to the world's rock scene after having their appetites whetted by the "christian rock scene". Does this mean that God cannot reach into lives involved in rock? Of course He can...P-T-L...but when He does it is in spite of the Rock-n-Roll not because of it.
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 12:22:04 PM
Yes, music is cultural. But let's not force anyone to like what you like. To force a congregation that is mostly over age 70 to do contemporary would be like forcing a contemporary church to do African or Asian music. Just because someone doesn't like your style of music does not make them legalistic. My grandparents don't like my music and I don't like theirs. Just like Todd has been saying recently- BALANCE.
Posted by: Bart | Nov 30, 2005 12:29:00 PM
pdl
Sorry, not buying it. Of course you're gonna see more "church kids and pastors sons" coming throuhg your doors. Have you ever been one? I feel sorry for them. They get hyperexposed to the bible their entire youth and THAT is what turns them off.
Rock n Roll isn't working? Are you serious? Is that why there is a MASSIVE spiritual reformation among teens and college aged people sweeping the nation? Is that why you can now find people in their early twenties sitting in significant positions in churches because of their passion? Have you even heard of the Passion movement?
Dude, it's ok to disagree. But to make such statements in the face of so much evidence to the contrary...come on man.
Todd says it better than I could. Style has nothing to do with substance. Style is how we communicate the substance. So my answer for that question is a big fat NO. As for your inference that Rock came about soley out of rebellion...well, I'm not so sure about that one. I was just going on your assumption. And is Rock the preferred rebellion? I'm honeslty gonna offer that it's not now. Rock is tame by comparison to some of the crap out there today. But even then, I have definitely seen even rap (which I personally despise, though for no spiritual reason) reach even the hardest of hearts.
Music is one of the most prevalent concepts in the OT. To infer that God only uses certain types to reach people is naive. Music alone doesn't lead people away from God. It's called free will. And it may have been a lack of discipleship on their mentors' parts. (I'm referring to the ones you mentioned.) I don't know, but demonizing a style of music simply because it is used by pagans is foolish and I think it is a perfectly good waste of potential to use for reaching people for Christ and for glorifying God.
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 12:40:35 PM
I have long hair that touches my shoulders, and a beard. I love riding motorcycles, and 4 wheelers. I like wearing blue jeans, pocket tee-shirts, and leather coats. Does this make me a rebel?
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Nov 30, 2005 12:46:39 PM
Wait a minute, Todd...what was your answer to #2?
You are saying: 'Yes RR's roots are(objectively/historically/currently) in satanism/immorality/rebellion specifically directed against Jesus Christ...but that's ok because generations past did the same thing--so let's bring it on into the church?'
ok...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 12:53:06 PM
Matt--sorry to gore a sacred cow!
My experience with RR in the church world is real and personally observed over twenty years of ministry. RR is from the pit of hell and is used by the Devil to anesthetisize the unsaved against the Message of the Gospel and to suggest to the church that the concept of Biblical separation is nothing but "legalism".
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 1:08:14 PM
That's cool if you feel that way pdl. While I'm not sure if there was an attempt at belittling me because of my age and experience in there somewhere, I'll just choose not to see it. We can just disagree.
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 1:13:52 PM
Oh yeah...Matt...one other thing on the style/substance arguement I was trying to make:
Do you seriously believe that style has no communicative function in regard to substance? The advertising world pays trillions of dollars for just the right "style" to let the customer know what is special about their product and what it is all about in the sea of other products. Style/the package/the form and feature has a tremendous bearing on how the public views the product. The RR package wrapped around worship of God lies about what He is really about--false advertising, if you will...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 1:21:43 PM
Matt...no attempt to belittle...honest...just letting you know that I have "been there and done that" (I even have the t-shirt to prove it!)...these are things to think and pray about...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 1:25:49 PM
Well, didn't Jesus associate himself with even the dregs of society just to reach them? I can see some parallels between the arguement you're making about rock music and Jesus with the woman at the well. Rock is where the people are...so why shouldn't we pounce on it?
And I specifically said that Stlye is how we communicate substance. Of course we need to let people know how awesome God is...so yeah, we do need to spend money on various forms of advertising. How is it lying about what God is about? People are so jaded now by various stimuli. To sell something, you have to make it "shiny" even if it is shiny by nature...like God is. Seekers need to be shown just how shiny he is.
How does this concept conflict with your ideas of what God is about?
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 1:28:45 PM
can anyone tell that pdl and I must be having a slow day at the office? heh.
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 1:29:39 PM
pdl, Yo dude, chill brother. Matt wasn't getting all up in your grill bro... Go to the crib G and relax...
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Nov 30, 2005 1:30:57 PM
Jeff said:
[I have long hair that touches my shoulders, and a beard. I love riding motorcycles, and 4 wheelers. I like wearing blue jeans, pocket tee-shirts, and leather coats. Does this make me a rebel?]
Depends what kind of bike you ride...I'm from Milwaukee and if you ride anything but a Harley in these parts YOU ARE not only a rebel, but a heretic...
About the hair and such...anything can be an idol or worn/done to communicate a message that is not in keeping with the message/person/character of Christ. Our standards for such things should be derived directly from the Holy Spirit. In other words, have you taken time to ask Him if it is ok with Him for you to have long hair...ie does it communicate to the world and the family of God the message/person/character of Christ. If the Holy Spirit affirms that it is consistant with Christ and not a stumbling block to others you have liberty to do as He directs.
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 1:39:04 PM
Matt...it is a slow day! I do think that we should "pounce on it"...but not participate IN it! For, example...a few years back (right after Columbine) Marylin Manson came to town...we went down to the auditorium to preach, hand out tracts and witness to the kids waiting in line. Besides havig to duck various food and beverage items/containers we had a productive for the Kingdom of God. Manson actually received one of the tracts that we had written up...after he read it he cancelled his tour (it was reported to us by an inside source that the tract had a big impact on his decision)...I also have gone to RR concert parking lots to share the Gospel with youth and adults drinking and gettiing high before the concert (BTW--you can't believe how many we professing Christians going to local youth groups etc...) At one event Axle Rose of Guns and Roses ahd been recently interviewd about his views on life...his message was that he had experienced it all and was more empty than ever...you talk about "pounce on it"...we created a tract with his picture and statements on it...we went car to car in the pre-concert party lot...what a great time of witness! My point is--we must not participate in the rebellion, but go into the rebellion with a clear message of Salvation...pounce but don't participate!
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 1:53:49 PM
pdl,
I believe I answered no to the first four questions you inquired of me.
You see... here's the problem we have when man draws the line.
You draw the line saying RR is of the devil.
I obviously disagree and draw the line in a different place.
To others, the issue of long hair (brought up by Jeff) is a place to draw the line. After all, all the RRers donned long hair. Long hair, to some, is a sign of disobedience (as are beards and riding motorcycles).
About the hair, you said:
"About the hair and such...anything can be an idol or worn/done to communicate a message that is not in keeping with the message/person/character of Christ."
See, you don't draw the line on the hair but you do about the music. My thinking on music is like yours on hair:
"About the music and such...anything can be an idol or played/performed to communicate a message that is not in keeping with the message/person/character of Christ."
Again, it's where YOU have drawn the line. My feeling is... that's fine for you... please live out your beliefs. But don't try and draw the line for me on non-biblical issues.
Whether it is hair length or music styles; respect other people's tastes/preferences, even when you don't necessarily agree.
:)
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 30, 2005 1:56:49 PM
That's cool man. I thought of that distinction a few minutes after I posted it. But what would you say about Jesus associating himself with lowlifes? Is it not along the same lines as associating ourselves with the music loved by the people we are trying to reach...(and ourselves...?) Just a thought...I really don't even know if it holds up...just something off the top of my head.
Posted by: Matt | Nov 30, 2005 1:58:33 PM
one more, pdl...
I applaud your efforts... but have you ever been to a sporting event? people act the same there (drinking, swearing, lewdness)... you aren't saying that sports is of satan are you? Obviously sports brings out the worst in people as well.
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 30, 2005 1:59:32 PM
pdl, yo dude I love you man.. You just made my day. I applaud you and your church for what you did at the concert's bro... That is the very same thing I do.. About the hair and beard thing it is from the Lord... But I can tell you this brother... I realize now where your coming from. But I can also say this... I may be wrong but so far it has been effective. My daughter was listening to the heavy rap stuff... I did not critize her or preach I slapped it in dude. I started listening to it with her. Next thing I know she now listens to it less. I even found out she was smoking and I asked if we could share one together. She quit that.. you all keep up the good work.
Oh yea, I seen a t.v. program one night about some ladies who worked red light districts. One of them out five had remorse and stated the same thing axel rose did, She was empty... I tried to find out more but couldn't.. The only the Lord said,"Pray for her Jeff, Just pray for her."
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Nov 30, 2005 2:05:11 PM
Todd said:
[I applaud your efforts... but have you ever been to a sporting event? people act the same there (drinking, swearing, lewdness)... you aren't saying that sports is of satan are you? Obviously sports brings out the worst in people as well.]
Todd, if you a rooting for any Chicago team, then, yes, your participation is "south" of God's country!
Anyway, I don't understand your point on this one????
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 2:10:52 PM
Here is my problem with drawing any lines for God that exclude others: What happens when the line is drawn at MY feet with the things I participate in? (And I, who have two degrees from TTU but will not recommend it to anyone, am a full blown heretic on numerous fronts!)
Posted by: Terry | Nov 30, 2005 2:16:19 PM
Todd,
BTW--I am not asking you to draw any lines on this issue! Only the Holy Spirit can do that based on the Word of God! I am wondering...Do you have a problem with the Apostle Paul "drawing lines" on hair length on men and jewelry/braided hair on women--how about head coverings? Those were/are debateable issues based on cultural norms--how does your teaching of non-line-drawing reconcile with such passages? Should he have kept his opinion quiet on these and how they applied to the church's relationship to the culture? Should he have just respected the opinions of others without challenging cultural applications/practices in the church? Are you a pastor? If so how do you deal with debateable practices/issues in your church that bear messages embedded in the culture that threaten God's intentions for your church?
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 2:33:46 PM
Getting back to the orginal post - as Liberty graduate and as someone currently finishing my MDIV at Liberty and someone who worked for Dr. Lovett I found this post so amusing. When I got to Liberty people always accused us of legalistic because of the rules. To hear someone call Liberty liberal is humerous. The rules they have, which have changed greatly the last couple of years are simply standards if behavior for living while on campus. They do not preach legalism nor are they liberal. It is an awesome school with people there from dozens of different denominations as welll as from over 70 different countries. Dr. Lovett is certainly a unique person but I can say this from knowing him personally - he has a true passion for evangelism and for local church.
The issue is simply - music style has nothing to do with being biblically conservative or liberal.
The content of the words alone determines the value of worship music
Posted by: Pastor Dan | Nov 30, 2005 2:38:47 PM
Terry,
Depends on what those things are. If you are living in willful sin or have wandered from the faith into doctrines of demons/true heresies...then the line is already drawn by God--repent!
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Nov 30, 2005 2:39:04 PM
Hi Bart:
"To force a congregation that is mostly over age 70 to do contemporary would be like forcing a contemporary church to do African or Asian music."
I understand what you are saying. However, how will they reach young people? How long will they survive as a church if they don't?
I would hope that if God called a contemporary church to reach African or Asian people, that they would choose to use some African or Asian worship music in their services.
I don't know that anyone "forces" a church to use a particular style of worship music. Rather they should choose their style so that it encourages God-honoring worship in the people they minister to, both the current flock and those God has called them to reach.
Posted by: Bill | Nov 30, 2005 2:39:41 PM
pdl,
One more short post, and I'll have to beg out... this discussion is interesting; but taking too much of my time today! :)
You aren't asking me to draw the line... you've drawn the line already.
Again... I personally will be dogmatic about things the Bible is dogmatic on. On other things like hair, music, dress, and all other gray areas, I'll usually side on the side of grace, giving a little extra leeway to others (because God does so for me).
My point is not to draw lines... my point is we all do it. (That's what makes it a line). Again, just don't think your line is more biblical than mine unless you have specific scriptural text to fall back on.
We could go round and round all day on this one... but unfortunately I can't.
It's been real, and it's been fun (and really fun, btw).
Todd
Posted by: Todd | Nov 30, 2005 2:52:12 PM
I'll have to go back and read all the comments but I have read a lot of stuff on this Way of Life website. I was doing research one day on gossip for a sunday school class nad came upon his site. I read and read and conclude that this man is so sad. What a shame. He really IS from the school of "you can't be a Christian and have ANY fun". What a pity. How can you experience the joy of the Lord living with a mindset like his?
Posted by: Abbey | Nov 30, 2005 4:43:03 PM
Zeissler said
"And really legalism is nothing more than a guise for fear and insecurity of facing a terrifying world armed only with your faith and trust in the Lord and equipped with the gifts of the Spirit. Facing the world with only "faith" scares most legaistic, religious spirit folks to death."
AMEN! Well said.
Posted by: Abbey | Nov 30, 2005 4:45:44 PM
Whoa... pdl, I don't want to make assumptions but does grace appear anywhere in your dictionary??
I was recently suspended from singing (contemporary P&W by the way) at my church (after eight years) because my appearance (though very modest) was not appropriate for being a leader in the church since my hair was not a 'natural' color. When I vocally disagreed with the non-biblical action they took against me, I am now labeled rebellious and divisive. Instead of going out and pushing OUR ASSUMPTIONS concerning what God wants shouldn't we be showing people through our actions of love and grace who God is? CCM, R&R, etc. are not creations of Satan, after all the devil did not create us, nor did he create our creativity, God did. God gave us the ability to creatively worship Him and no matter how we do it, He is the reader of hearts and HE decides what is good and what is not good. If CCM is rebellious, if my hair is rebellious, then I am in good company since Christ (the One we strive to be like on a daily basis) was called a rebel.
By the way, don't we call the apostle Peter what we call him because Christ called him a rock saying upon this rock I will build my church. I don't think r&r is the devil's secret weapon to lure people away from God. Personally, I think the constant division among God's people over non relevant issues is what turns non believers off to God... and that just may be the devil's secret weapon.... maybe?
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 1, 2005 12:26:27 AM
Hi Todd,
One last post here...I really did want to here how you deal with the issue of my last post listed above...when you get time. Thanks, and have a great day...
Oh...IDJ, actually grace has many functions beyond salvation in our lives...one of them is to "teach us to say no to ungodliness and worldly passions and to live a self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age..." (Titus 2:11-14) "Grace" that makes provision for sin is really "presumption" which is the Devil's "grace" also known as a "license to sin"...of which Paul repeatedly said, "God forbid"!
BTW--What color is your hair? Did you ask the Holy Spirit if it was ok for you to color it? Did you ask your church leadership beforehand if such a move would be compatiable with you position of ministry in the church...you may actually need to have grace toward them since your "change" put them in an acwkward situation...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Dec 1, 2005 10:47:07 AM
pdl,
I thought I had addressed your question. I'm not a pastor, just a mere webmaster at this stage in my life, but I wouldn't place non-biblical or extra-biblical demands on anyone I don't think.
Again, I think it all has to do with balance. That's something we've talked about alot here in the past few weeks.
Todd
BTW... I've never asked the Holy Spirit if it was ok to dye my hair or get a haircut... nor have I asked my church leadership. I'm not sure that either should really care. Again, a totally amoral issue. Unless you want to go back to the hair length and color and associate it with the devil's music to call long and orange hair sinful. :)
Posted by: Todd | Dec 1, 2005 10:59:02 AM
Actually long orange hair could be sinful if it was an outer expression of a rebellious attitude toward God--we should ask the Holy Spirit what he thinks in all situations, especially if they reflect in some way upon Him or the church...would you sit under the preaching of a man who stood in the pulpit with long orange hair...if not,why not...if yes, is there any place you would draw a line...how about letting a man in a dress teach in your Sunday School...do you think that maybe what is diplayed on the outside might reveal a problem on the inside? You still didn't deal with Paul's "line-drawing" in the biblical instances I cited!
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Dec 1, 2005 12:05:08 PM
I just remembered a joke by Jerry Clower.
There's a church that is discussing of replacing the light in the forey with a brand new chandaler. They brought up the idea and then opened the floor for discussion. Next thing you know it began to get out of control when all of a sudden the pastor called on the elderly man what he thought. He said, "Well, seems to me if we get the blooming thing no one will know how to play it."
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Dec 1, 2005 1:25:20 PM
My goodness... IDJ my heart goes out to you.
You've got to be kidding me. Your going to split hairs over the color of someone's hair. My goodness.
Did you ever hear the joke about the lady that asked her husband, "Honey will you love me when my hair turns grey." He said, Yea I reckon so, I've loved through three shades already.
Posted by: Evangelist Jeff | Dec 1, 2005 3:55:01 PM
pdl, I ABSOLUTELY DID (DID DID DID) pray about it and talk to my leaders at the church and they told me that they were all for it........ so what was that about me extending grace to THEM?? BTW, my hair has been black since they forced out our 10 year pastor through their possible.... mistake from non commmunication. As well, grace is not a ticket to sin, it is the love that keeps us from sinning. May grace abound in all things
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 1, 2005 4:23:43 PM
A guitar....and there was the opinion of the worship leader when i showed up with my accordian......
"make a joyful noise with stringed instruments, etc!"
The Lord truly has a sense of humor and praise His Name that He is the author and finisher of everything including the way we are to approach Him - "His gates with thanksgiving and courts with Praise - for He inhabits the praise of His people!!!
Posted by: bill | Dec 1, 2005 4:45:13 PM
Personally I love it when I can go to a church and the worship is uplifting and spiritual. I love it when there are drums and electric guitars and all sorts of instruments to praise God with. God told us to worship him in praise, and if that means even with a modern band, then so be it. As long as He is gloridied and not man, I don't think He cares about how we worship Him. I don't want to feel "dead" when I come to church I want something to lift me up and make me feel good from the stressful week.
Posted by: Debbie | Dec 1, 2005 7:05:20 PM
Amen sister! Although I think you meant to type glorified! ;-)
Aww, you know I luv ya!
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 1, 2005 8:16:16 PM
pdl,
I know your line drawing comment was directed at Todd but I wanted to make mention myself (being a former legalistic persona) the fact that this scripture you are referring to; you have left something out. Let me explain:
1 Corinthians 11:14-16 (NASB)
14Does not even NATURE (phusis from phuo definition C from the Vines; this is the emphatical word, and the phrase includes demons, men regarded as deified and idols) itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,
15but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
16But if one is inclined to be CONTENTIOUS (philoneikos- 2nd definition under section B. Adjectives in Vines; means simply "stubborn".), we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.
In other words we can reread this in the proper context.
14Does not even nature (demons, dieties, or idols) itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,(Romans believed men should have short hair and they shaved their heads for the dieties they worshipped.)
15but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
16But if one is inclined to be contentious(stubborn), we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.
So if Paul said that "we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God" wasn't he saying that such issues (if one wants to be stubborn about it) should be dropped because they have nothing to do with the churches of God?
respectfully,
Ivana
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 1, 2005 9:12:53 PM
IDJ,
Those were breataking hermeneutical gymnastics...wow...I give it a 10!
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Dec 1, 2005 10:11:29 PM
pdl,
WOW! 'Dem dar sum mitey fanci werds... whatcha think theer werth? 20 buck??? ;-)
On a more serious note, was that an implication that I misused the Vines which is a noted and widely used source by many biblical scholars even or are you implying that empirical evidence is flawed because it is not in accordance or is in rebellion with what you believe?
I am definately convinced that your response was an obvious avoidance of my answer to your question to Todd (which you keep insisting he answer.)
IDJ
BTW, gymnastics is something that runs in my family! ;-)
BTW #2 I have not been sarcastic with you, I am truly seeking to educate myself as to what you believe and respond in like manner. So was your response intended to belittle me or to joke around?
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 2, 2005 12:46:15 AM
pdl,
no comment?
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 2, 2005 2:21:50 PM
IDJ,
Sorry...for my sarcasm...I truly apologize!
I disagree with your exegesis of the above passage...the meaning is clear in the context of Paul's overarching theme of propriety in the worship and life of the church. He was using hair length to illustrate the differences that are natural between men and women and that God is the author of natural and relational order...assigning roles etc...he is building a case against the Corinthian's worldly practices which were "out of order" with His standards...the discussion culminates in 14:26-39. The discussion is a basis for us, in principle, to check our selves and churches for worldly practices that war against God's order...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Dec 2, 2005 3:34:10 PM
pdl,
apology accepted!
LOL it has been interesting reading these posts. Of course people are going to disagree, I almost think that it was intended to be that way so we would constantly be in search of the truth.
I know a great deal of scripture, but knowing does not always mean understanding so that is why I love MMI, I can read what others believe and research it on my own (with a little guidance). Thank you for so much food for thought!
Ivana
Posted by: IDJ | Dec 2, 2005 4:01:01 PM
IDJ,
Blessings to you...
pdl
Posted by: pdl | Dec 2, 2005 4:32:26 PM
To use Cloud as the poster boy for all separatists does separatists a disservice. He is aan extreme caricature, imo.
Posted by: Ed Groover | Dec 5, 2005 12:41:48 PM
Yeah, I hear y'all,
My church music group is going thru some dealings too, but we're at the point where some folks are complaining that they don't know the tunes we're playing. How are we ever gonna know any new songs of praise if we don't try them? How did we ever learn the old praise songs without ever trying them as new ones? When did everyone put a cap on buying Praise music anyway? "Keith Green, Rich Mullins, OK thats all I'm going to listen to-No more!" This "I want this and that" additude is why church's are turning into Mosque's. They can't find the young people anywhere and can't keep the doors open to survive! It's also why church buildings are decreasing and house groups are increasing. We're praisning God! Leave your selfishness at home!
Posted by: Doug | Dec 5, 2005 3:50:38 PM
I have been pastoring churches since 1967,and I have seen many changes in that time,but whoever said that we have to change with the rest of the world. Jesus Christ said, I am the same yesterday, today and forever more, He also said I change not. And the message never changes, sin is still sin,there is still a place called Hell, and those who reject Jesus Christ as their saviour still go to Hell. I don't answer for Jerry Falwell,or Billy Graham,I answer for me, My hope is in the Lord Jesus Christ,and I still "PREACH" "PROCLAIM", THE GOOD NEWS OF ST. JOHN 3-16. If you don't believe it,check it out at www.tellingthestory.com. Preachers, preach the word !
Posted by: Fred | Jan 9, 2006 2:07:08 PM
I know that different people have different taste, but we aren't talking about people's likes and dislikes. it is about the worship of a holy God. are we worshiping ourselves or God? If it is worship - God knows and will receive it as such. If not then it will have been in vain except to please the crowd.
Posted by: James | Jan 19, 2006 9:51:10 AM
It's not the music, the style or the instruments, it IS the attitude. If you don't have the right attitude, then it isn't worship.
The churches that a judgemental and legalistic are not christian. I make no hesitation about saying this. I have been to many many churches, and sad to say, some of them are not christian. I'm talking about churches from many denominations. Am I being judgemental?? Well, in a way, I'm a fruit inspector.
Posted by: PeterD | Jan 23, 2006 12:43:12 PM
Forget the debate over whether popular styles of music or traditional church choir and organ music should be used in church. You are sincerely wasting your precious time. There's nothing wrong with either so long as it is done well. The trouble with popular style (rock, jazz, hip hop, r&b, pop, etc.) is that it sincerely lowers the bar on how music is conceived, what music should accomplish and by whom. You can be sure that if Bach were playing hip hop, it would be great hip hop showing a multileveled arcitectural discipline which lies beneath the surface. The reason traditional classical church music survives the centuries is because it contains a degree of artistic merit that goes beyond style or fashions of any particular trend or fad. No less than years of concentrated study and delayed gratification go into the creation of great music whether it is organ and choir or electric guitars and keyboards. The point is, however, it is comparitively easy to create and attract interest through imitating popular sounds and sights of the latter medium and it is rightly suspect. On the other hand, it is another thing to show respect and gratitude toward those whose music respects a sense of the sacred through eliminating all reference to trend and fashion and instead raising the bar back up where it should be - toward all that is conciously developed and refined along lines of excellence for the EDIFICATION of people and the greater glory of GOD. Deal with it.
Posted by: John Naples | Jan 26, 2006 1:22:15 AM
No musical instruments in the church?
"Speak to one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord". Eph. 5:19 (see also Col. 3:16).
Some Christian's use this scripture to promote their idea that we should only have a cappella singing in a church service. They claim that nowhere in the New Testament does it say that we should use musical instruments in worship so, therefore, we should not do it. "Where Scripture is silent, we remain silent", they say.
The problem with their stand on this issue is that Scripture is not silent. This very passage properly defined refutes the notion that musical instruments should be banned from our worship service. Using Strong's Concordance of the Bible, here are the Greek definitions of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs:
• Psalms – A sacred ode accompanied with the voice, harp, or other musical instrument.
• Hymns – To celebrate; to play on a stringed instrument.
• Spiritual songs – sing (voice only). (See 1 Cor. 14:15-17).
Comparatively, the Old Testament definition of "psalm" from the Hebrew is instrumental music and "psalms" is a song to be accompanied with instrumental music. Also it means to touch the strings or parts of a musical instrument, i.e. to play upon it.
These definitions of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs from the New Testament Greek and even the Old Testament Hebrew clearly promote the idea that a church worship service not only is permitted to use musical instruments in worship, but that they should be used.
Posted by: Bobby Carby | Mar 5, 2006 9:36:10 PM
I've grown up in a fundamental, traditional church since I was in high school and my family are still members today. I can completely related to your article because I have heard so many legalistc rules and laws that I can probably make one up and my church would agree to it. I've known of churches splitting up over issues like chaning the carpet color after 20 years. My favorite one is that "women who wear pants are living in sin". Thats a classic. Did the men wear pants in the Bible time? Why do women today need a special dresscode? And the part about Billy Graham and Dr. Falwell never gets old. Being a Liberty grad this year, I feel like a failure in the eyes of my pastor. But the one thing that really strikes a nerve is the topic of worship music. Before I was saved, I was into all the rap and hip hop, rock, everything. All the music with cursing and sexual language is what I listened to. After I was saved I threw it all away, I believe my first CD was Point of Grace, then Avalon, then Jars of Clay, and so on. This music ministered to me on a level I never been before nor did I ever know existed. I was shouting praises to God. I was singing music with an absolute purpose. Come to find out later, its all of the devil (at least that what my church beleives). Guitars are of the devil. Oh..and the funniest thing I'm sure someone has heard, the third beat in any music is the devi's beat. You know...that beat that sometimes get to you and just want to move with the rhythm. Who knew rhythm was a sin? Thats what I heard from a music professor at my FORMER bible college that I transferred from before along came Liberty. I can go on and on. But Todd I've been there and heard that.
Posted by: Marcus | Aug 16, 2006 10:32:24 PM
Pioneering screenwriter Nigel Kneale, best known for the Quatermass TV serials and films, dies aged 84.
Posted by: Elliott Ridley | Jun 22, 2007 2:42:16 AM
