MMF - Biblical Principles for Church Music

[rlvaughn]

Most of the posts that I have read in the "Music Ministry" forum seem (in my opinion) to deal mostly with opinions rather than scripture. I am starting this post to deal with specific scriptures by which we may derive principles for Church Music.

I Corinthians 14:15: "...I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with understanding also."

Singing should take place with the mind engaged. Therefore, the words should be meaningful and intelligible. We should take thought of what we are singing. Think on it. Meditate on it. We should not be singing by rote - if we are not careful we are singing just by memory with no real thought of what we are saying. We also should not adopt a song merely because it has a catchy tune. The words must be meaningful. BUT, while unintelligible songs are worthless, so are those driven by intellectualism alone. Singing is a spiritual exercise, and even the best words become lackluster if there is no "feeling", no "reality", no "spirit". To sing spiritually we must first have the Spirit, and then be in a worshipful attitude toward God. The mind does not exclude the Spirit, nor the Spirit the mind. This could also include the idea of a Spirit-led song service, not just something totally planned out weeks or months ahead.

Colossians 3:16: "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly with all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." [Parallel passage - Ephesians 5:19]

First, notice that in Colossians singing is associated with the Word and in Ephesians with the Spirit (v.18). This is in agreement with I Cor. 14:15, and emphasizes that the Spirit and the Word are complimentary, not contradictory. The tri-directional purpose may be seen both in Colossians and Ephesians: (1) to others "teaching and admonishing one another"; (2) for one's self "in your heart"; (3) to God "to the Lord". Singing is a congregational exercise, not merely for the enjoyment of a single individual or a few individuals. Even those who can't or won't sing may be taught, admonished, and spoken to through the song. It must have a meaning, and through the song the congregants speak to one another. Though singing can and will be enjoyable, it is not merely for entertainment. Also, one is not singing just for the benefit of others; it must come from the heart. Singing is worship, and worship must be real. It is more than a form. It wells up inside and flows out. The song should be in our heart before it touches our lips. Finally, the song that springs within us and flows toward others must also be directed toward God in deliberate and sincere worship, praise and honour of Him. Even though the words may be good, and we may be feeling it in our heart, in the final analysis, the song is lacking if not directed to God. All three of these elements should be present in the music of the Lord's churches.

Consider also that these passages are vitally connected with John 4:24: "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

These principles suggest:
1. Songs should have meaningful content.
2. Songs should engage both mind and spirit.
3. People should think about what is being sung.
4. Keep in mind the edification of the WHOLE congregation.
5. The heart, more than the voice, should be "in tune".
6. God must be the focus of the song service.
7. Songs that are unintelligible (whether because of senseless lyrics or sounds that overpower the words) should be avoided.
8. The church music should aid and not impede us in worshipping God in spirit and in truth.

Other suggested scriptures: James 5:13; Acts 16:25: Matthew 26:30; Mark 14:26. This is about all I have time for now, but maybe these will get the discussion started.

[ September 14, 2002, 07:39 AM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

[ervin]

I agree with the 8 stated principles you have based on the scriptures given. But I do not think they prove any particular style of music over another, such as traditional vs. contemporary.

[rlvaughn]

It is a mistake to lump songs into categories (based on style or whatever other criteria), and then make generalized statements concerning these styles being right or wrong. The best approach to church music is to develop principles based on the Bible's teachings, and then apply those principles to an individual song to determine if that song is scriptural and appropriate for the congregational worship context. This may be more work, but it is better than the approach that has been taken in most of the discussions about church music on the Baptist Board. May I add that controversy over music has a long tradition in Baptist circles. Some of the past controversies were: whether to sing or not; whether to use the Psalms or "hymns of human composure"; whether usual singing (lining out hymns) or regular singing (using musical notation); whether to use round or shaped notes; and whether to use instruments or not.

More Scripture

Matthew 26:30: "And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives." Hebrews 2:12: "...in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee."

The "they" of the Matthew 26 is the Lord Jesus and His apostles. After the Lord instituted His supper, He and the apostles sang an hymn and departed into the mount of Olives. The Hebrews passage alludes to Jesus and prophecy concerning Him, and indicates He sang praise in the midst of the church (congregation). In light of this, and the Eph. & Col. passages, it is amazing to me that Baptists had a controversy over whether to sing when gathered as a church. Beginning in the old country and ending in the new, Baptists in the 1600-1700's were divided over whether or not to sing. The Philadelphia Association even added a statement concerning "Of Singing of Psalms in Public Worship" to the 1689 London Confession (concluding that it was ordained of God for public assemblies).

Some Conclusions:
1. Jesus put His stamp of approval on audible group singing by the church when He instigated and participated in it in gathered worship.
2. The tradition of closing the Lord's supper with an hymn is good one based on precedent.
3. The gathered church should sing songs that praise God.

James 5:13: "Is any among you afflicted? let him PRAY. Is any merry? let him SING psalms." Acts 16:22,24,25: "...beat them...and made their feet fast in the stocks. And at midnight Paul and Silas PRAYED and SANG praises unto God..."

Singing is most often associated with happiness and merriment (cf. Matt. 11:17). We must keep in mind that Christian joy differs from that of the world. In Philippi, in jail, Paul and Silas were both afflicted and merry, as revealed in their prayers and singing. Jesus sang an hymn with His disciples just before going into agonizing prayer in the garden. Paul and Silas sung in jail after being beaten and put in stocks. With the peace that passeth all understanding and joy unspeakable offered to us by our Lord, we find reasons to praise God in all situations. "Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation." Habukkuk 3:17,18

Some Conclusions:
1. The contented Christian will find reasons to praise God in all situations.
2. Singing is appropriate on occasions that may seem inappropriate by worldly standards. (Might James 5 imply that singing is not always appropriate, such as singing when one ought to be calling the elders of the church?)
3. Singing outside of the gathered church is acceptable to God as well as that in the congregation.
4. Praying and singing are a powerful combination.
5. Singing with a musical instrument does not inhere in the Greek word "psalmos". (I was taught that "psalmos" MEANS to sing with musical accompaniment. It may allow for that, but does not MEAN that)

smile.gif

[superdave]

So if we use the principles above, we cannot eliminate certain genre just because they are not "traditional", we have to evaluate each song on an individual basis, not only in regards to the particular style of the written music, but also take care that our actual performance/interpretation of the written music also follows the guidelines in scripture for Godly music. The fact that I can sing a song that the particular artist may have sung/played in a way that is innappropriate for a worship service does not neccesarily condemn that song as unfit. These are very good guidelines, and I think illustrate the broad spectrum of music that I believe is fully able to stand up to Biblical scrutiny, but not to the scrutiny of many Baptists.

That is not a condemnation by the way, since I have heard many say, "I just stay as far to the right as I can" which is a fine personal or even individual church stance. But many churches that would not follow that particular stance IMHO are still well within the Biblical guidelines for music. Even if they use *gasp* anything by the Gaithers.

;)

[Daniel]

Super Dave, you're more on track than you think. The particular danger we have in independent Baptist circles is not being independent. We look to a Christian college or university for our standards rather than the Word of God. We adopt lists of acceptable and unacceptable music from those places (as well as other sources) rather than consult the Lord, His Word and His Holy Spirit on the matter. We say we are independent Baptists, but don't we sometimes act like we are in a hierarchical system? Now, lest you think I use or accept all forms of music in our local church, think again! We test our music against many standards and principles--but these are Bible-based standards and principles, not man-made devices. Much of what is out there calling itself Contemporary Christian Music is actually the secular music industry remarketing itself to a demomgraphic group for mammon's sake. You all know that. Surely that's a no-brainer! (And no, I am not lumping all Contemporary groups or artists into a sweeping generality...I obviously know better than that!)What I'm saying is, let's get back to the Bible rather than a quasi-papal system for determining what music we should use or not use in our local churches. Then and only then will be on target to receive the blessing of God on our music ministries in our respective local church assemblies.

[ June 12, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[Eric B]

Wow, the posts on this thread so far really display great balanced and biblical ways of thinking! I pray this would spread among the independant fundamentalists.

[Dr. Bob]

There MUST be something terribly wrong when a bunch of Baptists agree (on anything, much less music)! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Use Scripture
Be balanced
Don't "adopt" someone else's standards
Separate good songs from poor artists

Sounds like lots of "AMEN'S" echoing off the Rockies on this one! tongue.gif

[Daniel]

Hey Dr. Bob and all of you fellow Baptists--we should be handling the music issue the way this thread has been going. (And may it continue in the fashion!!) The WORD OF GOD is our standard. Why shouldn't we approach ALL church issues in this fashion? May God help us to keep it moving in this direction!

[ June 12, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[Pennsylvania Jim]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daniel:
The particular danger we have in independent Baptist circles is not being independent. We look to a Christian college or university for our standards rather than the Word of God.

[ June 12, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good point, and I agree. Just to throw a wrench in the gears, though, we are also not independent if we allow our worship habits or church practices to be driven by the latest fads whether from the local "Christian" radio station or those sweeping from church to church from who knows where.

To ilustrate my point here are a few examples:
worship leaders
worship teams
praise choruses
small group ministries

Now I realize that these things are neither inherently good or bad. It's just that, as I see them, they have all the marks of a fad, which makes me wonder 1) what's behind them and 2) where did they come from.

[Larry]

Man! This is a good thread.

People from both sides of the fence, no doubt, read this and say, "that’s what I have been trying to say".

When it all boils down, what is left is a difference in how these standards are applied.

PA Jim, you hit the nail on the head.

[preacher]

Ain't this what satan hates to see?
One mind and accord!! :D

[Daniel]

PA JIM---You are right on with what I said yesterday about the Christian colleges, etc. We want our music to reflect the character of God and not the character of the world (in the cosmos sense). Why? Our aim in life is to bring GLORY TO GOD and to reflect the character of Christ. Let all areas of life, music included, be part of this Biblical mandate. That's why you're correct to say that we must be wary of fads or trends. Fads and trends are usually man-centered and not God-centered...and they don't last, I might add! Let the discussion continue...I agree, this is good stuff on this thread!!!

[superdave]

Larry talked about the difference in how the standards are applied, and another question would be, how would we specifically draw the line and say "This is right, and anywhere left of here is wrong" That seems to be the tendancy among Baptists and Conservative Evangelicals in general. Yet, our musical choices are many times made with non-Biblical factors. One point I was trying to make above is: musical styles, and their appropriateness are influenced by many things, Background, Culture, Ethnicity, Association, etc. Although these should not be our primary means of determining what is good or bad music, they do influence our decisions either consciously or otherwise.

Dr. Bob, I have to shout pretty loud for y'all to hear my amen echo off the rockies, but I'm yellin it all the same.

[Daniel]

Super Dave: You are so right about those factors that do influence our music decision-making process. The problem I see goes back a step from your point--people don't start making music decision BASED ON SCRIPTURAL PRINCIPLES. The Bible is only consulted much later rather than sooner. That's sad! It's like putting on gloves AFTER you've already developed a blister. Why not put them on before you start the job? The same with music. The "gloves" are the Bible principles. Then we can "get the job done" for the Lord in a much better fashion. Oh, well, wishful thinking, I'm sure...but nonetheless very true...let's keep shouting in the Rockies. Maybe someone will finally say, "OH, I GET IT!!" God help us!

[ June 15, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[PreacherBoy]

I like the topic of music seeing that I LOVE music. :D

I aggree with most things posted. I would like to add to a coment on something. We have no right to say where the line is bettwen good and bad, exept the Bible. Romans 12:2 "And be not conformed to this world". This is a guide line, there are two parts of music:
1) Lyrics
2) Music
If one is of the world than the music is wrong. I have heard some wonderful words in a song, but the heavy music was similar to that of Jimi Hendrix. What I am saying is, a christian's music should be of God of this this world. Music is meant to glorify God, that is why He created it. That is why He created us, to glorify Him.

[Daniel]

Preacher Boy....you were a little hard to understand in that last post, but I get the general idea of what you were trying to say. Be careful trying to ABSOLUTELY PINPOINT what is worldly or not. That is highly dangerous in the music world. You have to find the core principles (see earlier posts in this thread) and apply them as the Holy Spirit instructs you. "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin." (Romans 14) Don't do anything that causes you to have doubts about doing or not doing that thing. If you do have doubts, stear clear until you have done a careful Bible study of the issue and have prayed for the wisdom of God on the matter. Let us know if we can help you any more...(either in a post or a private e-mail)...God bless, MK. Your position as an MK is not an easy job, but I trust God gives you JOY IN SERVING JESUS. Really.

[rlvaughn]

PRINCIPLES VERSUS LAW

Many people would rather have a law than a principle because it is easier (requires less thought and less work), and, like the Pharisees, when it is performed we can feel like we have done what God requires of us. What in the world do I mean? Let me give an example that may illustrate. The Baptists that originally came to east Texas did not believe that tithing was a New Testament command, but rather that it was part of the Law of Moses. Instead of teaching tithing they taught the principle of giving as God prospered and giving out of love. The law said 10%, but the principle did not tell the individual exactly how much to give; he had to work it out himself. Some (misers) did not want anything at all to be taught concerning giving. Along came preachers (first, the SBC'ers) and taught that the tithe was a command for the N. T. church. At first, many fought it, but it was gradually accepted. Where once people did not apply the principle and give as they should, now many ONLY give 10% and believe they have done all God has required them to do!

I think this mentality applies in the question of church music. Some want a law that explicitly says what music may or may not be used. They are comfortable with that. Others do not want anyone to mention anything about music being good or bad. Let everyone decide for themselves and do what they want. A Biblical principle requires work and thought about how it should be applied. It places great responsibility on us. With music, if we honestly and inwardly deeply consider principles such as the ones we have discussed here, we will at times find songs that we love and enjoy do not really fit God's principles for music. We may fight it, because there is no law that says we can't listen to it. But remember, we know these principles (at least some of them), and we will give an account to God.

Why didn't God just lay down laws for all these things? Wouldn't that have been much easier? If He had, He would have given a law for every single situation in which we might find ourselves, and we would have to know every law for every situation. Principles may be applied broadly as we run into the different situations and problems of life. This also allows us more room to grow, and more individual soul liberty. But let's not use that liberty for license.

[Daniel]

Rl...excellent explanation of what this thread has been all about! Way to go! We have tried fastidously to avoid laying down a command. We have laid out Biblical principles and starting points. This is what we must do in these tricky, emotional areas such as music. God help us to keep on this road (or thread, should I say! smile.gif

[Psalm145 3]

The Bible says there is a type of music that evil spirits do not like(1 Sam. 16:14-23).
The Holy Spirit likes this type of music.

By simple deduction there must be a type of music the devil likes. After all, Satan is the greatest musician ever, although in a perverted way now(Ezekiel 28:13).

Satan and the fallen angels like the opposite of what the Holy Spirit likes. What kind of music do they like? They advertise! Just go through the record store and look at the CD covers filled with Satanic symbols.

I don't believe listening to rock music is a sin, but I believe it is dangerous. Music is a very powerful influence. It has the power to drive demons away or to attract them.

There is a wide spectrum of types of music with the Holy Spirit on one side, and Satan on the other side. I think it is wise to stay as far away from Satan's side as possible.

Realistic, not legalistic, Amen.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Bible says there is a type of music that evil spirits do not like(1 Sam. 16:14-23).
The Holy Spirit likes this type of music.
By simple deduction there must be a type of music the devil likes. After all, Satan is the greatest musician ever, although in a perverted way now(Ezekiel 28:13).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But this says nothing about "contemporary" versus "traditional" styles, both of which would not even exist for thousands of years to come. Other Scriptures show that lively danceable (rhythmic) music was accepted by God as worship (it was the Hebrew (mid-eastern style), so we can't deduce from this "All rhythmic music is what Satan likes, so then God must like only plain music". There is alot of plain simple music that has false religion behind it (think of New Age), so the line must be drawn primarily according to what the words are saying, and who or what is being praised.
This is not to say that the sound and other gimmicks don't matter at all, but if CD's have Satanic Symbols, than they are bad primarily for that reason. Then we can judge the music as having unclean spirits behind it, and it usually turns out that the stuff with Satanic symbols on it is the acid style which I do believe does cross the line in the area of the sound. (discordance, excessive noise & screaming/moaning, etc.)

[Daniel]

Eric...you were very balanced and cautious in your post, which I believe is the best approach. We have tried to keep very balanced and Biblical in this thread. Thus far, we're OK. Your response to the post about a music God likes and a type that Satan likes could be enhanced by the reference to how Elijah needed music played to calm his spirit so that he could hear what God wanted him to communicate to others. How about Saul's evil spirit being driven away with music? On the other hand, how about the orgy at the bottom of Mt. Sinai led by Aaron? Apparently there was some kind of musical involvement there...and it didn't seem to produce a wholesome result since this event devolved into a sexual orgy. The problem comes when we try to dogmatically pinpoint a particular style/sound as being demonic or angelic. Just how do you do that since God didn't spell that SOUND out to us in His Word? At this point we turn to principles of order/decency/moral excellence/wholesomeness. etc. We then make our personal application off of these Biblical principles. BUT AGAIN, LET US BE CAUTIOUS TO NOT SPEAK WHERE GOD HAS NOT SPOKEN! Careful, brethren...let the discussion continue....

[ June 28, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[DHK]

QUOTE by Eric:
"But this says nothing about "contemporary" versus "traditional" styles, both of which would not even exist for thousands of years to come. Other Scriptures show that lively danceable (rhythmic) music was accepted by God as worship (it was the Hebrew (mid-eastern style), so we can't deduce from this "All rhythmic music is what Satan likes, so then God must like only plain music"."

"Onward Christian Soldiers" is rhythmic, but not CCM.
The music in Exodus that cause the Israelite to dance naked around the golden calf was very rhythmic.
Almost all CCM is very rhythmic, and in fact, puts too much emphasis on rhythm and beat, rather than on the melody and the words. Try visualizing the music being sung and played in heaven by the angelic beings described in Revelation chapters 4 and 5. You won't find any hint of CCM or rock there.
DHK

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Onward Christian Soldiers" is rhythmic, but not CCM.
The music in Exodus that cause the Israelite to dance naked around the golden calf was very rhythmic.
Almost all CCM is very rhythmic, and in fact, puts too much emphasis on rhythm and beat, rather than on the melody and the words. Try visualizing the music being sung and played in heaven by the angelic beings described in Revelation chapters 4 and 5. You won't find any hint of CCM or rock there.
DHK
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Onward Christian Soldier is marching rhythm, and while people make the very same reference to the golden calf as "warlike" music, they then turn around and uphold marching rhythms as the accepatable choice. The Bible does not say specifically how rhythmic music was, but it seems that the worship David offered with dancing with "all his might" would certainly be more rhythmic than the early 20th century and before "marching" style hymns, and the historical information I could gather also hints that ancient mideastern (including Hebrew) music was "strongly" rhythmic, as is evident from the midestern style that survives today. As I d\said, we odten see "harps and strings" in the Bible, and then think of mellow symphonic music, and read that into the text. But much of that music is European, not mideastern. Who's to say what the angelic music in Rev. 4 & 5 and elasewhere is like (As CCM critic Tim Fisher admits, we have never heard a note of this heavenly music.) But let's not assume it sounds like classical or old hymns, which were also produced by fallen man (i.e. "the world"). We may be surprised by what we see (but of course, whatever it is like, it will glorify God's majesty).

[DHK]

Quote:
"Who's to say what the angelic music in Rev. 4 & 5 and elasewhere is like (As CCM critic Tim Fisher admits, we have never heard a note of this heavenly music.) But let's not assume it sounds like classical or old hymns, which were also produced by fallen man (i.e. "the world"). We may be surprised by what we see (but of course, whatever it is like, it will glorify God's majesty)."

Any good student of the Word of God can, by applying Biblical principals, come to a proper understanding of right and wrong in music. "Let's not assume it (heavenly music) sounds like classical or old hymns, which were also produced by fallen man (i.e. 'the world')." Sounds like poor theology. Most of those "classical and old hymns" that we are so accustomed to, were composed and written by God-fearing Christians, most of whom had a disdain for "this world." Many of them also were highly educated.

For example, Dr. Ray Palmer began his life as a clerk in a dry-goods store; he ended it as a beloved pastor of the Congregational Church of America, a learned Doctor of Divinity, and a famous hymn writer! The first of all his hymns is the most widely known and the best loved. From his dry-goods store he had passed to an academy and from there to Yale college, where he obtained his degree in 1830, when he was just 22 years old. After leaving college he began to teach, and it was then that he wrote his first hymn:

My faith looks up to Thee, Thou Lamb of Calvary,
Saviour Divne; Now hear me while I pray;
Take all my sins away; Oh let me from this day
Be wholly Thine.

Palmer says about his own composition, "I gave forrm to what I felt, by writing, with little effort, these stanzas. I recollect I wrote them with very tender emotion, and ended the last line with tears." That last line was:
Oh bear me save above---
A ransomed soul.

Eventually this hymn made ist wayin into all English-speaking countries, and has also been translated into numerous languages. Dr. Palmer wrote many other hymns as well.

One would do themselves well to search out the lives and testimonies of Charlotte Eliott (Just As I Am), Charles Wesley, Fanny Crosby, Dr. Robert Lowry (Shall We Gather at the River), and find out a little about them and the circumstances in which they wrote. How did Dr. Lowry come to write "Shall We Gather at the River," when at that time in July of 1864 there was a raging epidemic in the city of Brooklyn, which was his home? What inspired Fanny Crosby to write all the wonderful hymns that she has composed, even though she was blind almost all her life?

No, those hymns are not of the world! As one of them put it:
"This world is not my home, I'm just passing through.
My treasure is laid up somewhere beyond the blue."

'If it's rock, it's not Christian; If it's Christian, it's not rock.'
DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; Most of those "classical and old hymns" that we are so accustomed to, were composed and written by God-fearing Christians, most of whom had a disdain for "this world." Many of them also were highly educated. &gt;

Quite contradictory, unless their 'education' was somewhere *not in this world*.

&lt; ...Yale college &gt;

What an *unworldly* one that is! Is that where he learned the silly "thees," "thous," and "thines;" pronouns not in common usage for well over 2 centuries? Perhaps that is what you mean by 'having a disdain for this world.'

&lt; Eventually this hymn made ist wayin into all English-speaking countries, and has also been translated into numerous languages. Dr. Palmer wrote many other hymns as well. &gt;

Did he research all these languages to find archaic pronouns? and did he force a type of melody which would be very strange and foreign to many culture and language groups in which it was translated?

&lt; No, those hymns are not of the world! As one of them put it:
"This world is not my home, I'm just passing through.
My treasure is laid up somewhere beyond the blue." &gt;

They are composed of words anyone who can speak is capable of speaking, and notes and timing anyone who can sing is capable of singing. Cite the scripture for this "beyond the blue" clause.

&lt; 'If it's rock, it's not Christian; If it's Christian, it's not rock.' &gt;

That's ****** [don't you love those *'s?]. Country, jazz, 'soul,' 'big band,' folk... is that true of any of these also (IYO)?

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Let's not assume it (heavenly music) sounds like classical or old hymns, which were also produced by fallen man (i.e. 'the world')." Sounds like poor theology. Most of those "classical and old hymns" that we are so accustomed to, were composed and written by God-fearing Christians, most of whom had a disdain for "this world." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is preciselythe mistake we are making! Assuming because they were "God-fearing Christians", who had a "disdain" for the "world", that they were pure, meaning completely unstained by the world. God wants us to stive to be Holy as He is, but we must remember, that we are still fallen and will never attain this before the resurrection. (1 John 1:8-10). Just think, the CCM stars who are being trashed here are also "God-fearing Christians", who also have a certain "disdain" for the world (that's the whole purpose of having Christianrock, and Christian versions of everything else in the world, in the first place). But we see they still make mistakes. The whole issue basically is one of culture and generation, (which people think are better than others), not spirituality.
As I quote Michael Horton on my page:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"We too have been very confident in our abilities at resisting worldliness and secularism. After all, 'we don't dance, drink or chew, or go out with girls who do', and so while the devil has us congratulating ourselves on avoiding a decoy, he has pulled us into the very reef itself, and we are taking on water". (Beyond Culture Wars, p.236)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And one of the features of this "reef" is our own lack of sense of our own sinfulness, which allows ut to show so little grace to the world and brethren we do not agree with, while upholding our traditions as almost infallible.

[John Wells]

To the chief Musician, A Song or Psalm. Make a joyful noise unto God, all ye lands: (Psa 66:1 KJV)

To the chief Musician upon Gittith, A Psalm of Asaph. Sing aloud unto God our strength: make a joyful noise unto the God of Jacob. (Psa 81:1 KJV)

O come, let us sing unto the LORD: let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation. (Psa 95:1 KJV)

Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms. (Psa 95:2 KJV)

Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise. (Psa 98:4 KJV)

With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King. (Psa 98:6 KJV)

A Psalm of praise. Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. (Psa 100:1 KJV)

Hhmmmm! Maybe electric guitar "noise" is not as offensive to God as it is to some of us :eek: :eek: :eek:

I generally agree with the posts on this thread. Anyone who thinks God is not using present day Christian (true) musicians to draw His elect to Him for His glory and honor err in their judgment. ;)

[DHK]

Wellsjs, I love those verses you quote. Try meditating on them, and see if you can picture an electric guitar in any of those verses. I don't think that David or any of his chief musicians owned any. My son has learned to play the guitar. I might buy him a semi-acoustic guitar. A pastor in the area owns an electric guitar, and he's approaching 80 years old! In both cases each of them disdain the ungodly CCM music--that cheap imitation or the world's rock. When the Lord offers you T-bone steak, why do you dig around in the earth looking for worms to eat?

18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
The resultant outcome of being filled with the Holy Spirit is to speak or sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs--singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.
1. CCM is not psalms.
2. CCM is not hymns.
3. CCM is not spiritual songs--rather fleshly, carnal, worldly.
"So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom.8:8)
"Whosoever is a friend of the world is an enemy of God" (James 4:4)
"Be not conformed to this world." (Rom. 12:1)
"Love not the world neither the things of the world" (1John 2:15)

" Music reflects the mood of the times. Listen to the music of any society and it will tell you all you need to know. Listen to the music of our time. Have you ever heard anything so hopeless? Listen to Rock and Roll, to Heavy Metal. The beat hypnotizes the mind while the WORDS of the "music" fill the heart. If you want to know what's wrong with our young people, just listen to their music. Today's music glorifies drugs, rebellion, and attacks anything Godly. Listen to the BOOM BOOM, BANG BANG, CRASH, BOP BOP of today's pop music. Hillbilly and country music is not any better. It sings of bar rooms, bed rooms, cheating, sleeping around. Many churches are adopting the BOOM BOOM, BOP BOP beat of some of these rock groups. They have the same sound stage, same lights, same beat. Let's not compromise with the world with our music. EVERY CHURCH SHOULD GUARD ITS MUSICAL PROGRAM.
God's people are a singing people. The Book of Psalms is a Hymn Book. The Church have given to the world the most beautiful music. Read the titles of your hymnal songs. These are songs of comfort, of peace, of assurance, of hope, of faith, of love. The words are beautiful, and the melodies are glorious."
(quoted from the "Fair Dinkum" by Andrew Craig)

[MagicDar]

I think folks are totally misunderstanding the concept of not being conformed to the world. To obstain from being like the world in the way its being brought across this would mean we have to have nothing in our homes and we would have to remain locked in the privacy of our homes praying every day and every night non stop. The fact that we christians move along with technology with having computers and such means we are doing the same as the world according to how people are using that scripture to back up that ccm is wrong. The bible says in Psalms that we are to praise and it gives the instruments we are to use as well. This verse talks about using drums as well as dancing, so you tell me, how is it that God cannot be glorified with this type of music when he himself tells us to use those instruments to make that type of music and even dance to it to praise him.

Btw, now whats wrong with stage lighting and stage sound? How is this ungodly? :rolleyes: :D -dar

[Theopolitan]

I wish Aaron was back!! He could open all these dismal "Scriptural" arguments up and gut them like a master swordsman. MagicDar, Wells, and Eric B wouldn't have known what hit them!

I'm trying to get him to come back sooner than September! (We live in the same neighborhood and go to the same church.)

[ July 05, 2001: Message edited by: Theopolitan ]

[Daniel]

rlvaughn and I knew this thread would eventually degenerate away from the civil discussion of BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES into the emotional expressions/ourbursts manifested by many of these most recent posts (DHK excluded). Nearly everyone is missing the point that GOD sets the standards of holiness and purity in the scriptures, not feeble man...and here we are trying to set the standards in a man-made fashion. Shame on us! Why can't we go back to the original purpose of this thread and CIVILLY discuss the Bible as Rl and I originally intended. We really don't need Aaron to return any sooner than September if we can get this thread back on track. Hey, folks, let's try...

[MagicDar]

Well, actually I don't usually post with my emotions, see I've had so many conversations in the past since I was a teenager with adults so now I've basically heard just about every and any argument there is from ccm critics. I used to get all upset and ticked off but anymore I've realized that everyone will have personal insight on how they see it and believe but it won't change my belief. I feel strongly about music and I am comfortable and at peace with what God has done in my life concerning music. If it came across as emotional or offensive, I am very sorry, it wasn't meant to be in this manner. :D -dar

[DHK]

"it won't change my belief. I feel strongly about music and I am comfortable and at peace with what God has done in my life concerning music. "

Magicdar,
I don't want to be personal, but there are two characteristics in your response that are typical in many people, Christian and non-Christian alilke, that express themselves when confronted with something that they do not agree with.
1. One is the unwillingness to change--stubborness even when confronted with the truth. Your statement is "it won't change my belief." That's pretty dogmatic. In spite of what the Bible says, in spite of what glorifies God, in spite of the command "whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise," to think on these things; in spite of the command to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength; you would still say, "it won't change my belief!" Amazing! That's stubborness. Here is just one verse concerning this attitude: 1Sam. 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.
2. The second characteristic is emotion. "I feel....am comfortable....at peace" The world runs their lives by their emotions, by the way they "feel." If I ran my life by the way I felt, I wouldn't get out of bed in the morning, and I wouldn't bother showing up at work because I didn't "feel" like it. We don't act that way in the real world, but when it comes to Christianity that's precisely the way many people make their decisions--based on their feelings. I witnessed today to a man who converted to Roman Catholicism. He joined the RC church because he liked the ceremony and emotional peaceful setting that it gave. He could sit there and "feel" at peace. He made his decisions entirely based on emotions. He also was stubborn. He was not going to change his mind when confronted with the truth. I asked him about the truth of God's Word compared to the teaching of the Catholic Church. He replied that he knew the teaching of the Bible was different than that of the Catholic Church. It wasn't the truth that mattered to him. It was "I feel...comfortable....at peace," and he wasn't about to change. At least not yet. I am having a Bible study with him and his wife next week, so you can pray that they do change, and God saves them by His grace.

"I think folks are totally misunderstanding the concept of not being conformed to the world. To obstain from being like the world in the way its being brought across this would mean we have to have nothing in our homes and we would have to remain locked in the privacy of our homes praying every day and every night non stop."
Now who is misunderstanding the concept of "not being conformed to the world?" Jesus Himself said that "you are in the world, but are not of the world." God made man with intelligence, with a mind to use the wonders of technology around us, providing we don't abuse it. As with everything, technology can be good or bad, depending how you are using it. It was Guttenburg's press that first printed the Bible. What a marvellous invention that was. Be not conformed to this world (or this world system). Read the rest of the verse. "But be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God." Are you able to prove (demonstrate) God's good, perfect, and pleasing will in your life? Are you able to do this because your life has been so changed (transformed) by the Holy Spirit, that you no longer conform to this world, but rather you conform to Christ (Rom.8:29)?
"Be not conformed to this world." is a command to be holy.
To "be conformed to the image of his Son" is to be holy.
This whole issue centers around obedience and holiness.

Keep true to His Word
DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; "I feel....am comfortable....at peace" &gt;

That is at the top of the list among those think only the familiar hymns out of the book should be sung in worship. "When we sing 'It is Well With My Soul' I just *feel so comforted*," I once heard a man say. Likely enough, he is one of those "stubborn" ones you refer to, who will not change his mind about anything.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you want to know what's wrong with our young people, just listen to their music. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just change the words to "If you want to know what's wrong with our young people, just look at their upbringing.", and it becomes obvious how behavioristic this apprach is, even though we criticize the secularists and Christian psychologists for this. You cannot blame music styles for peoples' sins. Any sinfulness in the music is a symptom of a deeper problem , namely, sin (NOT the otherway around).
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Listen to the BOOM BOOM, BANG BANG, CRASH, BOP BOP of today's pop music. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
And while the beat may be used for sin, you still can't blame the beat as if it was what causedthe sin.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>1. CCM is not psalms.
2. CCM is not hymns.
3. CCM is not spiritual songs--rather fleshly, carnal, worldly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This i not true, unless it's purely the sound that determines these categories. As I say on my page: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Often, when denouncing "rock", the critics will claim what we are supposed to listen to and sing is "Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" (Col.3:16). But many of the contemporary Christian songs they criticize are either modern "hymns" (odes) of praise to God, and some are taken right out of the Psalms or other scriptures. Most are at least "spiritual" in that they advocate Christian values, and teach or encourage the believers (as the Colossians passage is instructing us), even if they may not be loaded with deep theology, or have a largely human orientation. Can this even be said about classical pieces that don't even have words, or the national anthems, which are basically "hymns" of praise to our country (a fallible human institution, and one whose past is greatly over-romanticized and viewed as almost without sin!). The problem is in how you define "spiritual" (pneumatikos), meaning "non-carnal" (or "ethereal" as opposed to "gross" --Strong). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From Theopolitan
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I wish Aaron was back!! He could open all these dismal "Scriptural" arguments up and gut them like a master swordsman. MagicDar, Wells, and Eric B wouldn't have known what hit them! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the whole problem. Scripture is constantly overridden ["gutted"] in favor of people's own arguments and claims. Why must we wait for one person to come back when we have the Bible which is supposed to be our final authority?

DHK again:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>1. One is the unwillingness to change--stubborness even when confronted with the truth. Your statement is "it won't change my belief." That's pretty dogmatic. In spite of what the Bible says, in spite of what glorifies God, in spite of the command "whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise," to think on these things; in spite of the command to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength; you would still say, "it won't change my belief!" Amazing! That's stubborness. Here is just one verse concerning this attitude: 1Sam. 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The question is, what is his "belief" he won't change? He's not saying "The scriptures say this, but I'm not changing my beliefs". The point is You say he's violating scripture, and he doesn't belive he is, so since therefore since it's you he's disputing, he can say you won't change his beliefs. You are assuming that what you are saying the scriptures say (that all contemporary styles violate those virtues) is so undeniably true that to deny it is to deny scripture. But as all of us are prone to misinterpreting scripture (including reading our own ideas into it), none of us have the right to take that kind of attitude

2. [answered by Rockfort]
Also, to dismiss someones claim of peace with God like that as just "emotion", you are are seriously violating scriptural teaching about conscience. An issue like this where God did not say that certain styles of music violate his character and the virtues He commands us to have, all we can have is our "feelings" of peace or conviction. God granted this o us in areas like this, else, He could have directly addressed the issue, as He did with countless other vices. We must trust that our brethren are obeying what God is telling tham, and we have no right to question that, unless we see that it violates the clear commands of scripture. If Dar or anoyone else of us is lying, and God is convicting us and we refuse to change, then we shall answer to Him for that. He did not ask any of us to try and determine people's hearts, because as Jeremiah says, we cannot even trust our own.

[DHK]

" You cannot blame music styles for peoples' sins. Any sinfulness in the music is a symptom of a deeper problem , namely, sin (NOT the otherway around). "

I disagree. Although man himself is ultimatley responsible for his own sin no matter what the conditions are, we can put people, especially children and young people, in environments where it is very easy for them to sin.
"And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side?" (Job 1:8-10)
God provided a hedge about Job, he protected him and blessed him.
In the same way I provide a hedge about my family, my children. I try to keep them away from the drug scene, immorality, and the unfruitful works of darkness. How? By providing the right environment. What musical environment caused the Israelites to dance naked around a golden calf?
What musical environment caused the evil spirit to leave Saul, and his heart to be calmed?
The style of music? Yes, it has an amazing effect on people, and gives them cause to sin.
Have you ever heard of "Woodstock?" The gathering together of thousands of teenagers to listen to a number of rock bands, the end result of which most of them became naked, not to mention the other things that went on at that time.

Quote:
"But many of the contemporary Christian songs they criticize are either modern "hymns" (odes) of praise to God, and some are taken right out of the Psalms or other scriptures. Most are at least "spiritual" in that they advocate Christian values, and teach or encourage the believers (as the Colossians passage is instructing us), even if they may not be loaded with deep theology, or have a largely human orientation."

Sounds like a good New Age re-definition of what Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs might be.
Just because they "advocate Christian values" makes them spiritual? Just about every religion in the world upholds the "ten commandments" which could be considered "Christian values." Might as well sing praises to "Allah" for that matter. They have "good 'Christian' values" too.

Quote:
"The question is, what is his "belief" he won't change? He's not saying "The scriptures say this, but I'm not changing my beliefs". The point is You say he's violating scripture, and he doesn't belive he is, so since therefore since it's you he's disputing, he can say you won't change his beliefs. You are assuming that what you are saying the scriptures say (that all contemporary styles violate those virtues) is so undeniably true that to deny it is to deny scripture. But as all of us are prone to misinterpreting scripture (including reading our own ideas into it), none of us have the right to take that kind of attitude"

His belief is Roman Catholicism and it is undeniably wrong! The Scriptures dogmatically says it is, and there is no question about it. You cannot conscientiously believe all that the Roman Catholic church teaches and be a Christian at the same time. I used to be a Catholic for twenty years. There are some things that we can be very dogmatic on. And yes I have the right to take that kind of attitude. If I know I am right I will state it, and not back down. This is a Baptist Forum, and the last time I checked we still have freedom of speech, and Baptists still have soul liberty. If you believe I am misinterpeting any Scriptures then come out and say so. Don't hide behind a bush and say, All of us are prone to misinterpreting Scripture etc, etc.

Standing By His Word,
DHK

[MagicDar]

DHK, What you are talking about is diobedience to others who disagree with my stand on ccm, not disobedience to God. The reason I say this is because, I have prayed about the music issue and have searched it out with God himself and when I say "I feel" what I really am saying is "this is the conviction of my heart that God has placed there". Why does anyone assume that because someone likes ccm that means they haven't prayed or searched for truth? I believe from praying and reading scripture that I have found the truth. Sorry you feel this is stubborness, but I also take the same firm stand against abortion, and I'm also not willing to change where that is concerned so is my stubborness wrong there too? Basic truth is we have two different types of tastes in music, neither wrong, but one being condemned by man but not God. smile.gif -dar

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I disagree. Although man himself is ultimatley responsible for his own sin no matter what the conditions are, we can put people, especially children and young people, in environments where it is very easy for them to sin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's true that people can be led into sin by certain environments, and I even admit this on my page. But it's usually more than just the music that causes the sin. It's the unsubstantiated claims that just a beat by itself causes all the sin

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In the same way I provide a hedge about my family, my children. I try to keep them away from the drug scene, immorality, and the unfruitful works of darkness. How? By providing the right environment. What musical environment caused the Israelites to dance naked around a golden calf?
What musical environment caused the evil spirit to leave Saul, and his heart to be calmed?
The style of music? Yes, it has an amazing effect on people, and gives them cause to sin.
Have you ever heard of "Woodstock?" The gathering together of thousands of teenagers to listen to a number of rock bands, the end result of which most of them became naked, not to mention the other things that went on at that time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're making the MUSIC all bu itself the cause of all the sin, supposedly proving that the beats always take total control of people (probably aided by demons), proving that they are universally bad. But in all of those cases you mentioned, there was alot obviously already spiritually wrong for the people to get into those "environments" in the first place. Then yes, the music may have helped in the wantonness, as the people were already given to the flesh and/or evils spirits. But that doesn't mean that similar music can't ever be used in a different context (like the dancing God accepted from David).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sounds like a good New Age re-definition of what Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs might be.
Just because they "advocate Christian values" makes them spiritual? Just about every religion in the world upholds the "ten commandments" which could be considered "Christian values." Might as well sing praises to "Allah" for that matter. They have "good 'Christian' values" too.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But then this can be said of calling only the traditional stuff "hymns, psalms, spiritual songs" as well.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>His belief is Roman Catholicism and it is undeniably wrong! The Scriptures dogmatically says it is, and there is no question about it. You cannot conscientiously believe all that the Roman Catholic church teaches and be a Christian at the same time. I used to be a Catholic for twenty years. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Roman Catholicism had nothing to do with this. We're talking about MUSIC. MagicDar just answereed this above, but it just amazed me how could you change the subject like that.

[John Wells]

DHK,

Picture yourself, if you will, in the dark ages in a monastery where Druid-like chants were the only form of musical expression. If you banged out your favorite hymn on a piano and sang along, they would more than likely burn you at the stake. Hmmmm . . . sounds like what you'd like to do to the CCM folks :eek: !

[Mikayehu]

I just wanted to post this as a general word of warning. I don't think we realize just how carnal we are. I think every Christian will readily admit to how much this world has desensitized him to the pure horror of sin. We drive down the road and see billboards that no longer seem as horrid to us as they should. We hear God's name taken in vain so often that we no longer recoil as we ought. So, I don't think we realize how much ungodly music has fed our flesh. There is no question that the rock industry as a whole is designed around one thing, to make money by immediately satisfying peoples' lusts.

I don't think many people deny that music has a very powerful influence on people. There are whole businesses designed to use different types of music to cause very specific emotions in people.

Now, if it is true that we are more carnal than we think (which is clearly taught in Scripture) and if music is being used all around us to appeal to man's carnal nature (which is blatantly obvious), then I urge fellow Christians to do a deep examination of the music they use in worship and see if that worldly influence has not crept into the worship of a holy God. I do not believe every CCM song is inherently wrong, but I don't believe we see how much the movement as a whole reflects the world and not Christ.

[DHK]

Magicdar
Feeling and truth don't necessarily go together. In fact, most times they do not. Can Satan put a verse of Scripture in your mind? Can Satan arrange certain circumstances of your life? Can Satan give you a false sense of peace? The answer to all three of those questions is yes, yet that is precisely how most people "feel" they have discovered the will of God for their lives. Perhaps you heard of the prayer of a girl that she wrote down on her wedding day:
"Dear God. I can hardly believe that this is my wedding day. I know I haven't been able to spend much time with You lately, with all the rush of getting ready for today, and I'm sorry. I guess, too, that I feel a little guilty when I try to pray about all this, since Larry still isn't a Christian. But oh, Father, I love him so much, what else can I do? I just couldn't give him up. Oh, You must save him, some was, somehow. You know how much I've prayed for him, and the way we've discussed the gospel together. I've tried not to appear too religious, I know, but that's because I didn't want to scare him off. Yet he isn't antagonistic and I can't understand why he hasn't responded. Oh, if he only were a Christian.
Dear Father, please bless our marriage. I don't want to disobey You, but I do love him and I want to be his wife, so please be with us and please don't spoil my wedding day."
That sounds like a sincere, earnest prayer, does it not? But if it is stripped of its fine, pious language it is really saying something like this:
"Dear Father, I don't want to disobey You, but I must have my own way at all costs. For I love what You do not love, and I want what You do not want. So please be a good God and deny Yourself, and move off Your throne, and let me take over. If You don't like this, then all I ask is that You bite Your tongue and say nothing or do nothing that will spoil my plans, but let me enjoy myself."

I think that story tells volumes.

Eric B:
"You're making the MUSIC all bu itself the cause of all the sin,"

No, I have already said that man is responsible for his own sin and the choices that he makes. However, the type of music that he listens to may influence him for good or evil.

"But then this can be said of calling only the traditional stuff "hymns, psalms, spiritual songs" as well.

I hardly think so. The Psalms taken straight out of the Word of God teach just a bit more than "Christian values." They happen to be the very words of God. Much of our hymns are steeped in theological teaching, (ex. The average believer has no idea that "Joy to the World" is a hymn teaching of the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in all His glory, not of His birth). Spiritual songs are just that--spiritual--not carnal. CCM imitates the world, and does everything in its power to be carnal. It is a carnal form of music. It appeals to the flesh.

Wellsjs
"Picture yourself, if you will, in the dark ages in a monastery where Druid-like chants were the only form of musical expression. If you banged out your favorite hymn on a piano and sang along, they would more than likely burn you at the stake. Hmmmm . . . sounds like what you'd like to do to the CCM folks!"

Sounds like what I'd like to do to CCM music; it's not the people I have a problem with--just the music.
Acts 19:19,20: "Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed."
I wonder if the "curious arts" included cd's and tapes of CCM music?
DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; Perhaps you heard of the prayer of a girl that she wrote down on her wedding day:
"Dear God. I can hardly believe that this is my wedding day. I know I haven't been able to spend much time with You lately, with all the rush of getting ready for today,.... I don't want to disobey You, but I do love him and I want to be his wife, so please be with us and please don't spoil my wedding day." &gt;

DHK's prayer:
Dear God, I can hardly believe you have given me the honor in these last days of straightening all these idiotic wordly people out. I know your word does not define music styles and condemn those that accentuate the second and forth beats, or which sound too much like pop or country or jazz, or any other type which was not known to exist when you inspired your writers to record your words. But I know you would not have given me the likes and dislikes for music that I have unless that is absolutely positively what you want the world to keep, and to annihalite all the rest of it. I also know it is possible for a song to proclaim the Lordship of your son Jesus and still come from another source than the Holy Spirit-- I Corinthians 12:3 notwithstanding here, because I just don't like the way some people express it; and that, of course, is why you gave me the preferences I have-- to show the world exactly what YOU want, which has to be what I want. I thank you for having me to realize-- unlike so many who think they are Christians-- that we must change people from without, and have them act as I want Christians to act; instead of you changing them from within to manifest Christ according to the understanding and the gifts and talents you gave them. Thank you for having me to understand and teach these kooks that Paul must have been wrong when he said "I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some" (I Corinthians 9:22). Yes, Lord, help me in this vital ministry to destroy anything that looks, sounds, or smells worldly. I wonder why you didn't give Martin Luther this same insight and did not stop him from writing "A Mighty Fortress" based on that popular barroom melody. Oh well, I would do everything I could to condemn that tune if it were not already long out of hand. I just thank you that somebody-- me-- knows exactly what you want people to do, which, of course, is what I want them to do also. We are one. Thank you that I am not as other men."

[MagicDar]

DHK, so what you are saying is this, you can pray with a sincere heart and ask God for wisdom and truth and instead Satan will give you a false peace and wisdom while God does nothing. The bible says, if you ask you shall recieve. I asked God for wisdom and truth and I believe (different from feel) that God did just that and presented me with truth. You may not agree with what God presented me but you may still have your own taste and that is fine. -dar

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Eric B:
"You're making the MUSIC all bu itself the cause of all the sin,"

No, I have already said that man is responsible for his own sin and the choices that he makes. However, the type of music that he listens to may influence him for good or evil.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but those examples you gave to prove the point that it's rock that caused those sins suggests precisely that. It may influence him, as you said, but I think in those cases there was alot more factors than just the music, yet you're saying "see... look what these people did! That proves that the music is bad, because the music caused it. (and therefore that type of music can't ever be used for anything good). Once again, this is way overgeneralized, but this kind of reasoning is the entire basis of this whole argument.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I hardly think so. The Psalms taken straight out of the Word of God teach just a bit more than "Christian values." They happen to be the very words of God. Much of our hymns are steeped in theological teaching, (ex. The average believer has no idea that "Joy to the World" is a hymn teaching of the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in all His glory, not of His birth). Spiritual songs are just that--spiritual--not carnal. CCM imitates the world, and does everything in its power to be carnal. It is a carnal form of music. It appeals to the flesh. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So some CCM songs are Psalms too ("Thy Word"), and they can also have deep theological teaching. And some old hymns are now being recognized as just teaching "Christian virtues", and otherwise being shallow, and even the forerunner of today's CCM. My point was that whatever content you will find in the old songs can be found in [at least some of] the new. Of course, as I address, if it's purely the sound that determines "spiritual" then you have an argument. But this passage, nor any other in the Bible says nothing about this. It is purely from one's own "association" and "knowledge", and 1 Cor.8 and Rom. 14 tell us how to deal with this. (Not condemn everyone else and claim they are dishonoring God).
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sounds like what I'd like to do to CCM music; it's not the people I have a problem with--just the music.
Acts 19:19,20: "Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed."
I wonder if the "curious arts" included cd's and tapes of CCM music?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're not getting the point. People back then would have seen your traditional piano/organ hymns as "curious arts" as well. Were they right, meaning your music should be burned?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>rlvaughn and I knew this thread would eventually degenerate away from the civil discussion of BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES into the emotional expressions/ourbursts manifested by many of these most recent posts (DHK excluded).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess I was involved in this. It was going well when Psalms 143:5 began posting about music that evil spirits liked, or something. I jumped into it, not realizing which thread it was, and then it became me, MagicDar and Rockfort vs DHK. (Don't see why he's being held up the only unemotional responder, though). Sorry that happened, but oh well, one thread in which people came to an agreement certainly didn't end the whole issue, so of course the debate would resurface, and that's the purpose of the board.

[John Wells]

DHK,

You said, "Acts 19:19,20: "Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed."
I wonder if the "curious arts" included cd's and tapes of CCM music?"

No, I'm sure they had MP3 players! :eek: That had to be it. Anyway, I appreciate your sense of humor . . . but not your stand on music! :D

[Daniel]

Hey, everybody: lighten up! We had originally hoped this thread would be the one CIVIL thread in the music ministry forum. It didn't turn out that way. What's done is done. It would be nice if things would tone down and return to the BALANCED approach with which we started this thread. (And, no, I am not naive about what Baptist Board is all about--it is a Christian ventilation forum. We all know that!). It had just been hoped that we could keep excessive personal expression out of the picture for just ONE THREAD!...and BTW, we DON'T want Aaron back right now. He needs a break. Don't pressure him. What do you say brethren (and sistren...LOL), can we go somewhere good with this? Go back to page one of this THREAD and see if we can pick it back up....is anyone game? I am....

[MagicDar]

If I was being offensive, I apologize, I never meant to offend anyone but mearly state my position on this matter. Anyway, I do believe ccm holds every biblical standard needed for godly music. :D -dar

[DHK]

Rockfort:
"Thank you for having me to understand and teach these kooks that Paul must have been wrong when he said "I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some"

You should first study the verse to find out what it means. Paul did not mean that he had to become a CCMer to understand and win CCMers to the Lord, as you imply. Paul was not teaching that one must become a drug addict to win the drug addicts; that one must become an alcoholic to win the alcoholics, that one must become an adulterer to win the adulterers, that one must stick his head in a garbage can to find out that it is dirty and stinks. You don't have to sin to know that sin is wrong. That's not what Paul was teaching.
Instead of taking one verse out of context look at the whole passage:
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
He lived as a Jew (culturally identifying himself as a Jew, which he was, when he was among the Jews). He lived as a Gentile or as one without the law (vs.21). He adapted himself to the culture of the Gentiles, still being within the bounds of the Bible, when he went to the Gentiles in order to win them. In no case did he ever sin or transgress the law of God in his methods to win souls.
When I go to the nation of Pakistan I become as a Pakistani--eating their food, living in their type of accommodations, speaking their language, adapting to their culture. That is what Paul is talking about.

Magicdar:
" DHK, so what you are saying is this, you can pray with a sincere heart and ask God for wisdom and truth and instead Satan will give you a false peace and wisdom while God does nothing. The bible says, if you ask you shall recieve. I asked God for wisdom and truth and I believe (different from feel) that God did just that and presented me with truth. You may not agree with what God presented me but you may still have your own taste and that is fine." -dar

My feelings and yours are inconsequential. Some people are very emotional; some are not. Don't live your life by your feelings.
My opinions and yours really don't matter.
What my own tastes are as compared to yours makes no difference at all.
Even, in many cases, our prayers: James 4:3 says, "Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts."
What does matter is this: "What saith the Lord?"
Never mind the tastes, opinions, feelings, etc. what does Scripture say on this matter?
How do you find the will of God--through your feelings? No--through prayerful study of the Word of God--something that has been neglected in many of these posts.

Staying true to His Word,
DHK

[John Wells]

Dear DHK,

You stated, "Paul was not teaching that one must become a drug addict to win the drug addicts; that one must become an alcoholic to win the alcoholics, that one must become an adulterer to win the adulterers . . ."

That's quite a leap to go from those examples to: You don't have to play contemporary Christian music to reach those who like and listen to "pop" music today. I see no reasonable basis for a sound analogy. Your examples would be harmful to the believer who mimicked them, whereas my example and Paul's in the passages you introduced are not harmful. It appears to me that Paul would be in agreement with my example just as he suggested modifying our non-harmful habits if it would prevent "a brother from stumbling." Thanks for the evidence. Sorry it worked against your position! :D

[ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: wellsjs ]

[Daniel]

I do believe that things may be in the early stages of getting back on track (at least in terms of MagicDar and DHK). That's good. DHK's points about getting away from our feelings is a good start to restoring the civility intended in this original thread. I will be the first to admit that EACH INDIVIDUAL will have to be fully persuaded in his or her own mind. I doubt if we will SOLVE anything in this forum. That's not likely...but we can have the civil exchange of ideas! That is actually possible, believe it or not!

[MagicDar]

DHK, I suppose you didn't catch what I've said in prior posts, but thats ok. I'm not depending solely on my feelings where music is concerned, I mentioned before I have prayed and searched scriptures which is why my convictions on music are as they are. Feelings are totally irrelivant, which is why I do not base my conviction on feelings but solely on the peace God himself has given to me thru scripture and prayer concerning this issue. smile.gif -dar

[Mikayehu]

I really was hoping to get a reply to my previous post, for I think I made good points in it, but, alas, no reply (as I weep uncontrollably smile.gif). I want to try rewording what I said in a little different format. I'm just kind of curious how you guys would answer these questions.
1. Does music (not talking about lyrics) affect people? More specifically does it stir specific emotions (love, anger, happiness, gloom, sensuality, etc.)?
2. If so (which I think all will agree to), which of these are the primary focus of the rock industry as a whole?
3. Do you view CCM as appealing (generally speaking) to the same emotions?

While I don't believe that CCM music should be a matter of separation for believers, I do believe that many do not realize (actually no one realizes) how carnal we are. Rock music was designed to appeal to the basest part of man (I can't imagine anyone disagreeing to this), and CCM (as a whole) seems to invite this into the worship of a holy God. Music is an incredibly difficult issue, but it seems to be the most powerful communicator of all the arts. We guard ourselves so carefully (or at least we should) over what movies we watch, or what art we look at, or what speech we use, and we especially would if Jesus were standing before us. But everything in this world system tugs at us to be impure. We have become so desensitized to the horrors of sin. Ought we not take a very careful look at how the world has influenced us in terms of music?

[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: Mikayehu ]

[DHK]

Here's a summary of Bible guidelines for Christian Music:

BIBLE GUIDELINES FOR CHRISTIAN MUSIC CHRISTIAN MUSIC SHOULD PRAISE THE LORD JESUS CHRIST ? NOT MAN
The LORD is my strength and my shield; my heart trusted in him, and I am helped: therefore my heart greatly rejoiceth; and with my SONG will I PRAISE him. Psalm 28:7

CHRISTIAN MUSIC IS FOR THE LORD ? NOT FOR THE WORLD
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts TO THE LORD. Colossians 3:16

CHRISTIAN MUSIC IS A NEW SONG ? NOT AN OLD SONG
I will sing a NEW SONG unto thee, O God: upon a psaltery and an instrument of ten strings will I sing praises unto thee. Psalm 144:9

CHRISTIAN MUSIC'S MESSAGE SHOULD BE CLEAR ? NOT VAGUE OR DECEPTIVE
I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the UNDERSTANDING also. 1 Cor. 14:15

CHRISTIAN MUSIC SHOULD EMPHASIS THE MESSAGE ? NOT THE MUSIC ? NOR THE MUSICIAN
Sing forth the honour of his name: make his praise glorious. Psalm 66:2
CHRISTIAN MUSIC IS IN THE LOCAL CHURCH ? NOT CONCERT HALLS, NIGHT CLUBS.
Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the CHURCH will I sing praise unto thee. Hebrew 2:12

CHRISTIAN MUSIC SHOULD FEED THE SPIRIT ? NOT THE FLESH
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and SPIRITUAL songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. Colossians 3:16

CHRISTIAN MUSICIANS SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE LORD ? NOT WORLDLY
18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Ephesians 5:18-21

These guidelines were found at: http://www.av1611.org/cqguide.html
I would challenge you to go that site and read the entire article. You may find it quite enlightening.

[MagicDar]

DHK, I agree with all of those and once again I still find all those qualities in ccm everytime I listen to it.

If the link you provided goes to Dial the truth, I've seen it already, which is actually how I found this board. :D -dar

[DHK]

Then, Magicdar, having read that article, you would agree with their introductory statement:
"We get many requests asking our opinion of certain CCM performers or a certain type music. There is no way for us to keep up with every performer in CCM or every type of music. We put together these simple, common-sense, Bible guidelines. If you're concerned about your music, see if it passes these Bible guidelines. After listening to hundreds of CCM tapes, CD's, and videos, at least 95% of Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) does not pass these Bible guidelines."

[MagicDar]

DHK, thats just the point I'm trying to make. I'm not the least bit concerned about the ccm I listen to. I took this type of test years ago and still came up with the same answer, and that is that it does match up to bible guidelines. I suppose I should make mention too, that about 90% of the dial the truth web site I disagree with, in fact I've been in contact with a man named Bruce from a Christian Rock Apologetics site and Bruce and I agree on just about all things concerning music.

In short, I am not confused in any way about the music I listen to but I have grown in Christ thru it, which is another reason why I listen to it all the time. Whatever things are pure, holy and just, if there be any virtue or any praise think on these things.

One thing I noticed about "DTT" is that they tend to really focus on songs of artists that do not directly mention God but still help in a christian walk. They rip apart these artists for not using the name God or Jesus in every single song. Actually I could go on and on about that, simply put I don't agree with the stand that site takes in any form on music. God has given me a style and message that I love and enjoy...I go with it.

;) -dar

[DHK]

"DHK, I agree with all of those and once again I still find all those qualities in ccm everytime I listen to it." (July 11)
I suppose I should make mention too, that about 90% of the dial the truth web site I disagree with," (July 13)
Agree or disagree? What a flip-flop here. The website carefully goes through explaining 7 Biblical guidelines for Christian music, which you first say that you agree with. Then two days later you say, well actually I only really believe in 10% of them?

Quote:
"They rip apart these artists for not using the name God or Jesus in every single song."

Here are the lyrics to one of those songs posted by another member on another thread.
"Lord Of all creation
Of water, earth, and sky
The heavens are Your tabernacle
Glory to the Lord on high

God of wonders beyond our galaxy
You are holy, holy
The universe declares Your majesty
You are holy, holy
Lord of heaven and earth
Lord of heaven and earth"

Song: God Of Wonders - Third Day
by B J Halo

Which Lord and which God is this song talking about? It might easily be talking about Allah, especially if it were translated into Arabic. There are many gods in this world. There is only one Lord Jesus Christ. Worship Him. There is nothing in this song to indicate that this is the triune Godhead, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Jesus Christ of the New. He could be anybody.
This is a good example of a New Age "Christian" song, like many others that you say they "rip apart..."

[MagicDar]

DHK, Let me break it down for you a little better. I do agree with the biblical principle...I don't agree with your personal views or should I say the web's views of the artists and or the songs...please let me know if any more explanation of that is needed so I clear it up ok ;)

As far as the song you posted above...what about that song leads you to believe the songwriter would be speaking of any other God other than the God of scripture?

Its says....Lord of ALL creation, of the galaxy of the heavens....I don't mean to be rude towards you but it sounds as though you might be confused as to who created all of creation and the universe. Just reading that song makes my mind go right to God himself, not to any false gods but the only God who exsists. I really am sorry but that song has no indications of new age, it calls the God of creation holy and lifts him up. -dar

[Lorelei]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DHK:

"Lord Of all creation
Of water, earth, and sky
The heavens are Your tabernacle
Glory to the Lord on high

God of wonders beyond our galaxy
You are holy, holy
The universe declares Your majesty
You are holy, holy
Lord of heaven and earth
Lord of heaven and earth"

Song: God Of Wonders - Third Day
by B J Halo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was the one that posted this song in another thread, not B J Halo

~Lorelei

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Which Lord and which God is this song talking about? It might easily be talking about Allah, especially if it were translated into Arabic. There are many gods in this world. There is only one Lord Jesus Christ. Worship Him. There is nothing in this song to indicate that this is the triune Godhead, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Jesus Christ of the New. He could be anybody.
This is a good example of a New Age "Christian" song, like many others that you say they "rip apart..." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Many of the old hymns are just as ambiguous, (if you will call it that), and many CCM critics are even admitting this to a certain extent. Remember, the real argument is about the sound. The issue of the text is simply thrown in to try to add weight to the case against CCM, but this is weak, especially in light of the fact that not every old hymn specifically mentions "Father, Son, Spirit" like the Doxologies, or even Jesus. And there are false Jesuses and false concepts of the Triune nature as well. The JW's have their own songs, and I'm sure they mention Jesus, but are we to accept them?
Anyway, looking it it realistically, by definition, the holy "god" who is over all creation, and is to receive glory is the God of the Bible. All the other gods do not share these attributes, and usually, their religions do not even give one god these attributes* (the high god generally is a total mystery, if acknowledged at all).

*Note: Even Allah of the Muslims is technically the God of the Bible (The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the God who created Adam, the biblical prophets, etc), though they make him into a false god by rejecting Jesus as his only begotten Son, and his plan of salvation. (By this token, the same thing can be said of the Jews as well, but most of us seem to not want to say that)

[DHK]

In Hinduism they believe in Brahma--the Creator.
In Shintoism they believe in Amaterasu--their chief god/goddess.
In Zorastrianism they believe in Ahura-Mazda as Lord
In Islam they believe in Allah as the only one supreme God.
In Sikhism "Satnam" is the true one, absolute and sovereign.

"Lord Of all creation
Of water, earth, and sky"
---Say what you will, but that description can fit any one of those religions, and many more considering all the false cults we have, each with their own version of "God."

Look at at the typical hymn book:
"Free from the law, O happy condition, Jeus hath bled, and there is remission;
Cursed by the law and bruised by the fall, Grace hath redeemed us once for all.
Once for, O sinner receive it; Once for all, O brother, believe it;
Cling to the cross, the burden will fall, Christ hath redeemed us once for all."

Alas, and did my Saviour bleed? And did my Sovreign die?
Would he devote that sacred head for such a worm as I?
At the cross, at the cross where I first saw the light, And the burden of my heart rolled away,
It was there by faith I received my sight, And now I am happy all the day!
Well might the sun in darkness hide, And shut his glories in,
When Christ, the mighty Maker, died For man the creature's sin.

You do not have to guess at what the above two hymns are talking about or about Whom they are talking about. "Christ, the mighty Maker, died for man the creature's sin." Pretty clear, isn't it.

[Psalm145 3]

Here is a radio program I heard on Fri. July 13. It is called Crosstalk on the VCY network. This program had brother David Cloud talking about CCM and the neutrality of music. You will need Windows Media Player to here this program. It is about one hour.

If anyone is interested, click this link.
Crosstalk July 13, 2001 David Cloud- CCM (http://www.vcyamerica.org/audio/ct010713.asf)

[MagicDar]

DHK, Sorry but I feel you are trying to justify your point with a great song that I personally see God of scriptures all thru. If I were to have heard this song from Third Day I would have known exactly who they are talking about, perhaps that is because I do appreciate the nature and creation of God and I see God all thru it. It doesn't float with me. smile.gif -dar

[John Wells]

Dear Psalm,

David Cloud has a problem with everyone and every ministry except himself and his own! :(

[Lorelei]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DHK:
"Lord Of all creation
Of water, earth, and sky"
---Say what you will, but that description can fit any one of those religions, and many more considering all the false cults we have, each with their own version of "God."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So we don't admit that our God is the Lord of all creation because other religions have gods that created things too? How absurd! My God IS the Lord of all creation! He is the Lord of the water the earth and the sky! I will praise his name in song, in Spirit and in witness to all that he has done!

Here is another song by the same group.

City On A Hill
Lyrics by Mac Powell / Music by Third Day

You are the light of the world
A city on a hill cannot be hidden
Shine your light before all men
That they might see your works and then
Praise your Father up in Heaven

A city on a hill cannot be hidden
Standing tall before all men
To show the things that it's been given
And everything that it can give
Just like that city on a hillside
We got a light that's deep within us
No, don't keep it to yourself
Just remember how you felt
When you first gave your life to Jesus

And I now that our salvation isn't based on the things we do
But it's only given by the grace of God
By the sacrifice of Jesus, and if we really did believe
We were born to share this message with someone


Any problems with this one?

~Lorelei

[DHK]

There is nothing wrong as far as the lyrics are concerned that I can see, Lorelei. The first part refers to some Scripture in Matthew 5 about being a light, and the very last part refers to believing in the sacrifice of Jesus. At least this song mentions the name of Jesus.
Since I don't listen to CCM, I don't have a clue about the style or type of music that goes with the lyrics, so I cannot make a comment about that, except to say that I believe that the type of music being played is also very important.
DHK

[MagicDar]

DHK, I think its totally messed up to think every christian song has to have God's name or Jesus's name or the name of the Lord in it or it's not considered a christian song??

The most important thing about the music with it is that the person listening to it enjoys it....simply put. -dar

[Daniel]

For days I have silently watched the discussions between DHK and MagicDar. Now I can no longer remain silent. MagicDar pushed me over the edge tonight. Her final post puts her at the center of the universe. I'm sorry, the test of what is good or bad or right or wrong is not whether a person likes or enjoys something, it is the infallible principles of the Word of God. (Trust me, I'm not speaking off the top of my head. I've read her posts in the teen section and see the same thing. My 14 year old daughter can't get over some of the things she says there!) Dar, I'm not attacking you. I am the guy that has stood at the head of the line to try to bring this thread back into line with the scriptures and away from personal attacks. I am simply urging you to get out of the way and get back to the Bible. Your warm/fuzzy expressions are NOT the test of anything in Christianity. Sola Scriptura. Yes, music is subjective, but the Biblical principles DHK has articulated have been sound and correct through and through. I haven't been a minister of music, music teacher and Christian music performer for 18 years and not seen where your thinking heads. Trust me, Dar, the end result is not good. Please get away from your subjective, fuzzy thinking. Listen to DHK, rlvaughn, Pslam 145 3 and others who are trying to reason with you. Please!

[ July 14, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[Eric B]

After Scott McClare (forgot his BB tag) mentioned Steve Miller's Contemporary Christian Music Debate I went and ordered it, and i finally came yesterday. It is a greet treatment of the issue, and bears the professionalism that I can admit my site lacks, plus is less confrontational, but addresses the same points. HE doesn't say "music is neutral" or that you can do anything you want, but is truly balanced.
Ayway, on this subject he points out <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Many inspired Psalms are by no means "theologically rich". Psalms 70 is simply a cry to God for help. Psalm 150 is an exhortation to praise God in various places and various ways. Critics should take care lest they find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to explain how "And Can It Be" in all its theological profundity is superior to much of the inspired Psalter.
If a song were written solely about how great it is when people get along with each other, would we consider this shallow? If so, we would demean Psalm 133. "Theologically rich" as a standard has the appearance of spiritual wisdom, but it is actually an attempt to be more spiritual than the Bible<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also, I had been following some of Aaron's links and came back across Godwin, Watkins, Bearsley (on music) and others. I hadn't read many of them for a while, so forgt the extent of their harshness. Cloud is not even quite as bad as them, and Fisher is civil compared to many of them. Their rhetoric is totally ridiculous. Yes, they may think "C-rock" is wrong, but they accuse the people of "wickedness", "rebellion", being "false prophets", "deceivers", etc. They accuse people who do not have their convictions practically of being devoid of the Holy Spirit, since this is all so "clearly wrong according to Scripture". They are so right, and dismiss all responcses as trying to "justify wickedness". There is no reasoning with them, so why do they bother preaching at everyone? Could it be to puff themselves up? Godwin seems to get some satisfation at the idea of his teaching driving people to emotional cycles of trauma (anger, confusion, denial, delusion, rebellion --See http://www.freedomministries.org.uk/godwin/jefchap1.shtml)
I still don't know why we look to these people as sound biblical authorities.

Welljs-- Cloud does seem to get along with Godwin, Watkins and Beardsley. While BDM (Rick Miesel) criticizes KJV onlyism (Which Cloud and the others are), Beardsley, who is apart of BDM has a KJV-only statement. But with their emphasis on dividing over the last doctrinal disagreement, I wonder how they overlook the KJV issue.

[DHK]

"The most important thing about the music with it is that the person listening to it enjoys it....simply put."-dar
This is the most important characteristic for you in order for music to be judged good, godly, spiritual music??

[MagicDar]

I feel it is best to back off from this subject. It is not important to me who disagrees or agrees with me on these things, the fact of the matter is that I believe I totally hold God's biblical standards on music. Daniel if you and or your daughter were to read previous posts you would have seen that I too agree with the biblical principles DHK had mentioned for music, and that those principles lie in the lyrical content. I believe its the music end of it that is left up to taste and that I totally do not believe the bible has anything to say about.

I want to back away from this particular subject because its becoming another well beaten horse and nothing is getting accomplished, I don't wish to change anyone, and I can tell you now that no one is going to change what God has placed in my life.

So to end my part of this,,,,I want to end on a friendly note,,,,,DHK, God bless you and to others on this particular thread many Blessings to you as well as you search for truth on this matter. :D -dar

[Daniel]

Dar...thanks you for your graciousness in this last post. You know as well as anyone that music (and the Bible translation issue) causes the most reaction within Biblical circles. This thread as well as the one called contemporary music at church has illustrated this principle. It has been no one's desire to hurt anyone in these posts; we have simply wanted to open people's minds to other people's viewpoints. I have respectfully read the posts on CCM from those that defend its use. I may greatly disagree from a Biblical POV, but I have recognized the differences that exist amongst Christians on this matter. May God's spirit help each of us to be fully persuaded in our minds about what we believe God has to say on this topic as well as many others that cross the path of the modern-day Christian...So, Dar, thanks again for your graceful exit. I hope that you will still read, listen and study. We're never too old to change...on another note: if anyone wants to pick up this issue from a Biblical POV, let's go.... ;)

[Eric B]

On the BaptistFire board, there was an old "contemporary vs Traditional music thread that had seem to have dies, yet someone just yesterday posted a link to this interesting Dallas News article:
http://www.dallasnews.com/religion/417701_musicone_14rel.html
It consists of 3 people: one takes the traditional only position, one defends contemporary, and another sidelines the whole styles issue, favoring the singing of Scripture. Each writer starts one discussio, and the other two respond (links two the other two are in the upper right)

I just wanted to point out that Johansen may be right that there is too much emphasis on entertainment, but as with other CCM criticisms, there is too much conjectural assumption that the old is always better ("delayed gratification"), ignoring that the pre-modern age was just as sinful as today's pop-culture, only it was manifested differently. In his book (which was the other text beside Fisher in the class I had years ago) he advocates asceticism and monasticism, even though these are equally false, paganized extremes that are condemned in scripture (even though they would later infiltrate the Church)

[hugo]

DHK,

What's wrong with liking a certain style of music based on whether or not
it brings me pleasure? Is music supposed to be disagreeable to be spiritual?

All music is worldly, just as all food is worldly. It is created by human beings using instruments of this world. I enjoy good music just as I enjoy good food. Is doing either sinful?

You have talked in this thread about worldly music as if there is a kind of music which is not of this world. Name a style or kind of music which did not originate on this world. Perhaps you could also do me a favor and name certain sounds or instruments which are not of this world.

praise the Lord with the drum and dance (Ps 150)
hugo

[DHK]

Ver. 3. The "psaltery" was a ten stringed instrument. It is constantly mentioned with the "harp." The psaltery was struck with a plectrum, the harp more gently with the fingers. Psaltery and harp speak to us in figure of "law and gospel." --Thomas Le Blanc. (from Spurgeon's Treasury of David: Psalm 150:3)
I do not know what drum you are talking about.

Quote:
"What's wrong with liking a certain style of music based on whether or not
it brings me pleasure? Is music supposed to be disagreeable to be spiritual?
All music is worldly, just as all food is worldly. It is created by human beings using instruments of this world. I enjoy good music just as I enjoy good food. Is doing either sinful?"

What kind of logic can we draw from this? All music is worldly, and all food is worldly. Jesus listened to some music and also ate food. Therefore Jesus was worldly. The Bible says: Love not the world. Are therefore commanded not to love Jesus?
We are not talking about food--that which is a basic essential to keep one alive. If you don't eat you don't live. That is not the case with music. Food, unlike music does not affect one's morality, unless you start talking about the sins of drunkeness, over-indulgence in anything. But that is not the case here.
Music, with or without lyrics, affects the emotional and spiritual well-being of a person. There is worldly music and spiritual music. I have posted these Scriptures before; I will do it again:

1 John 2:15,16:
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
James 4:4
Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

The Word of God has much to say about "the world:" Love not, Be not conformed, etc. There is obviously good and bad music, worldly and spiritual music.
Ephesians 5:19:
Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
Colossians 3:16
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing
one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

Notice in both Eph. 5:19 and in Col. 3:16, the term "spiritual songs." By the very usage of the term "spiritual," Paul indicates that there must be unspiritual music, that is worldly music.
In the most recent posts, we have been discussing primarily content or lyrics. In other posts I have referred to the effect of the style of music on individuals. Here are some examples.
1. What was the style of music that David used when Saul's heart was quieted, and the demonic spirit left him? Was it rock? CCM? What would you compare it to? Remember David was a skilled musician on the harp.
2. What was the style of music used that caused the nation of Israel to dance naked around a golden calf? Was it the same as David's? Perhaps a little bit more similar to rock?
3. Have you ever heard of "Woodstock?" An event in Bethel, New York, that drew over 500,000 young people and about 30 rock bands together for three days of nothing but "doing your own thing."
That included drugs, sex, protests, and of course a lot of loud raucous "worldly" rock music. It was rebellious, and was a primary cause of rebellion. I am sure that had the musicians all been playing harps and violins, things would not have gotten out of hand like it did. I am not saying that the music was the only factor here, but it was one of the major contributing factors to the rebellious spirit of the time.

How do you sing with grace? How do you make melody in your heart to the Lord, when it is the beat that overpowers every other aspect of the song? What truly constitutes a "hymn?" Is your music spiritual or worldly? of the spirit, or of the flesh? You cannot serve two masters. There are definite styles of music that are wrong, fleshly, worldly. And the Word says "Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God?" Whose friend are you?

DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; Notice in both Eph. 5:19 and in Col. 3:16, the term "spiritual songs." By the very usage of the term "spiritual," Paul indicates that there must be unspiritual music, that is worldly music. &gt;

Let us use your own reasoning here... "By the very usage of the term "spiritual," Paul indicates that there must be unspiritual music, that is worldly music." So, any music not SPIRITUAL is UNspiritual, meaning worldly? What Paul said in both these passages is speak to "one another in songs AND hymns AND spiritual songs..." 3 specifics, but only one is *spritual songs*--then by your logic the other 2 are UNspiritual music, "that is, worldly music," as you stated.

&lt; Here are some examples.
1. What was the style of music that David used when Saul's heart was quieted, and the demonic spirit left him? Was it rock? CCM? What would you compare it to? Remember David was a skilled musician on the harp. 2. What was the style of music used that caused the nation of Israel to dance naked around a golden calf? Was it the same as David's? Perhaps a little bit more similar to rock? &gt;

It could have been the same as David's tune, for all we know. You can blather all this wishful thinking you will, but when you assume a fact not in evidence it should be regarded as incompetent. This is really a wild idea that styles of music known only in recent times must have been around to produce the sins of masses of people centuries ago!

&lt; 3. Have you ever heard of "Woodstock?" &gt;

Yeah, Snoopy's little bird friend?

&lt; An event in Bethel, New York, that drew over 500,000 young people and about 30 rock bands together for three days of nothing but "doing your own thing."
That included drugs, sex, protests, and of course a lot of loud raucous "worldly" rock music. It was rebellious, and was a primary cause of rebellion. &gt;

Oh yeah, that. We can be sure, of course, that the Boston Tea Party, the 'shot heard round the world' at Lexington, the French Revolution, the Bolsheveik assault, Bolivar's campaign.... used "worldly rock" music to tickle those 'rebellious' motives.

&lt; Is your music spiritual or worldly? of the spirit, or of the flesh? &gt;

I have never heard any music anywhere which was not played on a natural-- not supernatural-- instrument, and which was not made audible to me by vibrating my *fleshly* eardrums. David's "23rd Psalm," Newton's "Amazing Grace," and Rambo's "We Shall Behold Him" are all played and heard by worldly/fleshly means.

[hugo]

CHK,

The timbrel, I believe, was a drumlike instrument.

Music of itself is not spiritual. It is the words that communicate spiritual ideas.

You are correct, I believe, in saying that music effects the emotions, which in turn effect what we do. If there is a downside to CCM it is that there is excessive emotionalism, but that is a part of our culture and a part of who we are. Our culture has become more emotional and less rational and detached--for better or worse. It approaches what I believe was the cultural norm of the Mideast. The Jews danced in their celebrations and they had music to do it by.

Old time music lends itself more to contemplation. CCM lends itself more to excitation. Neither one is inherently spiritual are they? It takes context and words to establish the spirituality or worldliness of a song. I can take any hymn music and put salacious words to it and use it in an orgy. The spiritual song becomes a worldly song by context and words.

Question. Which of our human emotions cannot be used to glorify God (none)? The music that incites those emotions is ungodly.

Viva Voce rocks
hugo

[DHK]

Rockfort:
Your logic needs no comment--just nonsensical.
Read Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 again, look up the words "psalms," "Hymns," and "spiritual songs" in the original languages if you have to, but at least in a good dictionary. I am sure that you will come to the conclustion that all three of these terms refer to spiritual, and not godless, "worldly" music.
Please try to make some sense in your posts without first arrogantly "blathering" and dismissing what I have written without an 'intelligent' answer.
Instead of talking about "wishful thinking," incompetent evidence," and "wild ideas," just simply answer the question at hand: Was David's music, that he played before Saul, more like Rock? CCM? or what? You describe David's music to me Rockfort, as he played before Saul.
Your ignorance of events such as Woodstock ("Yeah, Snoopy's little bird friend?"), is telling. If you don't know what happened admit it--don't deny it and then be sarcastic about it. You can't deny the facts of history.
I'll ask the same question again Rockfort: Is your music spiritual or worldly? of the spirit, or of the flesh?
Reread my prior post. This time read the Scripture also. In case you miss it here is one verse:
"LOVE NOT THE WORLD." I guess that includes its music too, doesn't it?

DHK

[DHK]

Quote:
"Old time music lends itself more to contemplation. CCM lends itself more to excitation. Neither one is inherently spiritual are they?"
--With which music in the background am I more likely to read my Bible, or meditate on my Bible. You answered your own question. An agitated mind ("excitation") does not help one grow spiritually.

[Rockfort]

I will take you on in a test of logic any time, K--&gt; Boolean Algebra, tautologies, proving limits, LaPlace transforms, or anything that involves pure logic.

YOu had pointd out the term "SPIRITUAL songs" in the passages indicated, and said songs not so labeled were UNspiritual. You qualified nothing about any other terms involved, and you said music is "spiritual" or "unspritual." Furthermore-- using your own suggestion, a compilation of dictionary definitions say "psalm--" or "psalmos--" is a song sung to a harp, akin to verb, "psallein--" to twitch; play. So, if you are claiming any song sung to a twitched harp is "spritual," that shows the fallacy of your reasoning. "Hymn" is a song *in honor of* someone or something, not necessarily Deity...the "Marine's Hymn," for example, is sung in honor of that branch of the service. So if you need confirmation that psalms and hymns are natural and "worldly," (besides the fact that they are played physically on physical instruments), it is there. A psalm is played in the natural world with a physical stringed instrument, whether you like that fact or not. And it is detected by vibrations on one's eardrum, a part of the natural physical world.

&lt; Was David's music, that he played before Saul, more like Rock? CCM? or what? You describe David's music to me Rockfort, as he played before Saul. &gt;

I was not there. Were you? Neither of us knows how David's music in that incident sounded.

&lt; Your ignorance of events such as Woodstock ("Yeah, Snoopy's little bird friend?"), is telling. If you don't know what happened admit it--don't deny it and then be sarcastic about it. &gt;

LOL I though that crack might be on your level, but evidently is beyond the capacity of your thought processes. Sure I know about Woodstock and the mudholes and flagrant sex, et al. Is it the music, not the sex and drugs, you object to?

&lt; I'll ask the same question again Rockfort: Is your music spiritual or worldly? of the spirit, or of the flesh? &gt;

I have never heard any music which was not sensed by vibrations on my physical eardrums. Did you? If you have a spritual nonphysical instrument that plays music which you sense by nonphysical means, then tell us all about it.

&lt; "LOVE NOT THE WORLD." &gt;

Is that only for God to do..."For God so loved the world..." (John 3:16)?
&lt; I guess that includes its music too, doesn't it?&gt;

Actually, I am very largely a music hater. It is probably less than 1 % of all types of music I like.

[DHK]

Quote:
"YOu had pointd out the term "SPIRITUAL songs" in the passages indicated, and said songs not so labeled were UNspiritual. You qualified nothing about any other terms involved, and you said music is "spiritual" or "unspritual." Furthermore-- using your own suggestion, a compilation of dictionary definitions say "psalm--" or "psalmos--" is a song sung to a harp, akin to verb, "psallein--" to twitch; play. So, if you are claiming any song sung to a twitched harp is "spritual," that shows the fallacy of your reasoning. "Hymn" is a song *in honor of* someone or something, not necessarily Deity...the "Marine's Hymn," for example, is sung in honor of that branch of the service. So if you need confirmation that psalms and hymns are natural and "worldly," (besides the fact that they are played physically on physical instruments), it is there. A psalm is played in the natural world with a physical stringed instrument, whether you like that fact or not. And it is detected by vibrations on one's eardrum, a part of the natural physical world."

Again, your logic is misconstrued my dear brother. A spiritual song can be nothing else than a spiritual song. That part should be fairly obvious. Conversely, the same is true for carnal. As for definitions of other terms please remember that even while discussing CCM, we must heed to CCC---Context! Context! Context! In the "context" of Paul's letter to either the Ephesians or Colossians, no where is there mention of a "Marine's Hymn," or any hymn sung in honor of the marines. Your illogical reasoning takes Biblical terms and defines them with unbilblical meanings. What kind of logic is that?
I never said "any song sung to a twitched harp is 'spiritual.'" Those are your words. I have said in the past that any instrument, if used properly, can be used for the glory of God. Most musicians use their instruments to glorify themselves and their egos, rather than God.
Psalms are Scripture. Obviously they are not worldly--of the world that we are commanded not to love!
When a Psalm is put to music, the music may or may not be worldly, depending on the musician and how he plays his instrument. Hymns follow the same basic rule. Usually, when I hear "Amazing Grace" being sung or played in the traditional way it sounds like a beautiful hymn, and it is. But I have heard, and no doubt you have to, "Amazing Grace" butchered to the rock beat of some worldly musician, who thought he could make a buck by putting good Christian lyrics to "worldly music." Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world..." That includes the music of the world. There is obviously a type of music that our Heavenly Father likes, and a type that he hates. "For whosoever shall be a friend of the world is the enemy of God" The Bible does not contradict itself Rockfort. Christ died for the world in that he died for each one of us, but he certainly did not die for the things of this world--that which he hates, and that which is carnal and draws Christians farther and farther away from Him.
Is your music spiritual or carnal?
DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; A spiritual song can be nothing else than a spiritual song. &gt;

Sung with "spiritual" vocal chords, played on "spiritual" instruments? It sure would be dandy if we could do that, but our vocal chords and our instruments are physical and natural.

Your quote: "Read Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 again, look up the words "psalms," "Hymns," and "spiritual songs" in the original languages if you have to, but at least in a good dictionary."

My response: "a compilation of dictionary definitions say "psalm--" or "psalmos--" is a song sung to a harp, akin to verb, "psallein--" to twitch; play. So, if you are claiming any song sung to a twitched harp is "spritual," that shows the fallacy of your reasoning. "Hymn" is a song *in honor of* someone or something, not necessarily Deity."

Your response: "As for definitions of other terms please remember that even while discussing CCM, we must heed to CCC---Context! Context! Context! In the "context" of Paul's letter to either the Ephesians or Colossians, no where is there mention of a "Marine's Hymn," or any hymn sung in honor of the marines. Your illogical reasoning takes Biblical terms and defines them with unbilblical meanings. What kind of logic is that? I never said "any song sung to a twitched harp is 'spiritual.'"

On the matter of looking up words, you sure went from a proponent to a detractor right quick! I follow your suggestion, you don't like it yields, and then you say, "Context! Context! Context!" Well, make up your mind-- is something to be gained by considering the meanings of the terms involved or not?

Yelling "Context" is usually a copout by someone who sees the scripture does not say what they want it to say. I have read Jehovah's Witnesses literature which uses that scheme against Bible readers who see Jesus says, "I and the Father are One," and we (accordig to them) take it *out of context*. 'Churches of Christ' say others take Ephesians 2:8 ("saved...not of works") *out of context*. So anyone who spouts "Context!" should be suspect about the stands they take.

&lt; I have said in the past that any instrument, if used properly, can be used for the glory of God. &gt;

Now show us a scriptural designation of "proper." Show us the limitations of time, tone, phrasing, emphasis, et al. If there were precise definitions to the elements of music, testing whether a piece is "proper" would be simple. The idea of "proper," though, is YOUR idea, and scripture does not give any such precise data.

&lt; Psalms are Scripture. &gt;

That is not the definition of psalm, which you requested I look up.

&lt; Usually, when I hear "Amazing Grace" being sung or played in the traditional way it sounds like a beautiful hymn, and it is. But I have heard, and no doubt you have to, "Amazing Grace" butchered to the rock beat of some worldly musician... &gt;

The words remain the same, regardless of it being sung/played the "traditional" way. The verses you have dealt with say "SPEAK TO EACH OTHER in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." If the words come through, they have been so SPOKEN.

&lt; ...who thought he could make a buck by putting good Christian lyrics to "worldly music." &gt;

Are you telepathic on top of the rest of this? *Bucks* are made in a heap of ways on Christian things/concepts. Piles of bucks are made selling hymnals, books, tracts...and then by preaching and speaking, doing weddings, seminars... the fact that people make their bucks off Christian activities is not convincing in any exclusive way of one method over another.

&lt; There is obviously a type of music that our Heavenly Father likes, and a type that he hates. &gt;

No, it's not so obvious. God looks on the inside, not the outside (I Samuel 16:7). And not a piano, nor organ, nor guitar are on the *inside* of a person. And the sound waves which eminate from singing exist in a medium *outside* the person, who may or may not mean a word of what comes out. God does not need to hear it come out to know the heart and mind of the person.

So answer this question: Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?

[DHK]

Rockfort:
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
I have shown you context. I have given you definitions. I have demonstrated to from Biblical passages what could be considered a “proper” style of music. But it is you that remains not open to the clear teaching of the Word of God in this area. Go back in the posts and read the five Biblical principles of Christian music. Follow the link to the supporting website. See if you agree with it. Then form an opinion.
As for context., I have not taken Eph.5:19 and Col.3:16 out of its context; you have. You have by redefining its terms. You turn around and accuse me, and say that it what the JW’s do. Yes it is, but not what I do, what you do. You change the meanings, and redefine the words to your own liking. Any one with very little intelligence can see that a hymn as defined in the Word of God is not referring to a hymn as sung to the marines, or in honor thereof, but incredulously you do. Redefining terms is New Orthodoxy. The SDA’s are very good at it. So are most liberals. You have redefined a psalm outside of the Biblical context of what a psalm is. You do not want to accept the Bible for what it says. You want to force your ideas of music into the Bible at any cost; even if it means perverting the Scriptures to the nth degree.
I have shown you “proper styles” of music. But “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf.
Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him.
There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it?
Your idea is to force the world’s music into heaven.
Rockfort, I say this only to point out the truth of God’s Word, and not meaning and personal offence to you, but:
You are an adulterer. You are a married person committing adultery. Check James 4:4
CCM is married to the world and you, if your saved are married to Christ. You have departed from your Bridegroom and gone and committed adultery with the world which God hates. “Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God. He starts of that verse by saying “Ye adulterers and adulteresses.”
Is your music spiritual or worldly? Which are you defending?

DHK

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have shown you “proper styles” of music. But “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf.
Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him.
There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This has gotten ridiculous. Now we see "styles" of music in vagure references to music in the Bible. The Golden calf incident is the closest thing in identifying a style, since it involved dancing, which probably made it lively. But the other Scriptures on the "good" music give no such evidence as to the style. Where do you get simple piano or organ melodies from the account of David and Saul, or Rev. 4&5? Even the "harp" was different from what we think of, but we read mellow symphonic styles into this. The biggest evidence against your arguments is that "wild dancing" was also used by David as worship to God, and He accepted it.
All this shows is as I said on my page, that music was generally lively (both sacred and secular) and the determining factor in its spiritual worth was what the song was about, or who the worship was being directed to. There were always plain melodies, but the austere "traditional" music you insist was mentioned by name in scripture was largely from Greek Platonic influence centuries after the Old Testament was written.
You are reiterating the same points over and over, and not adressing these facts that contradict your arguments, just like Cloud, Godwin, and the rest of them. And also like them, I see, people who disagree are likened to atheists and others who deny the Bible

[DHK]

8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

Eric, can you honestly say in your heart that the new song that they are singing in verse nine, and the worship of the lamb in verses 12-14, is all done to the beat of rock music, or even has the remote possibility of being sung to rock music?

[Rockfort]

&lt; A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. &gt;

Ain't that an outstanding piece of wit you just made up there?

&lt; I have shown you context. &gt;

You have shown PREtext.

&lt; I have given you definitions. &gt;

Nope, I was the one who posted the definitions from the dictionary, at YOUR suggestion.

&lt; I have demonstrated to from Biblical passages what could be considered a “proper” style of music. &gt;

Nothing but your own incompetent opinions.

&lt; As for context., I have not taken Eph.5:19 and Col.3:16 out of its context &gt;

If you don't "speak" with 3 different things-- psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs-- you have.

&lt; You have by redefining its terms. &gt;

Make it plain here-- did you, or did you not, request me to look up definitions of 'psalms' and 'hymns?' The fact that the definitions do not say what you want them to say is immaterial.

&lt; You turn around and accuse me, and say that it what the JW’s do. &gt;

No, I did not turn around as I said that.

&lt; You change the meanings, and redefine the words to your own liking. &gt;

LOL. Silly displacement. I gave the definitions at are your own urging, by the methods you suggested.

&lt; You have redefined a psalm outside of the Biblical context of what a psalm is &gt;

When you suggested I look up the word in a dictionary did you think it would be in a biblical context? If not, why did you suggest it?

&lt; I have shown you “proper styles” of music. &gt;

You have shown nothing but your worthless musical critique.

&lt; If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! &gt;

Wrong. The answer here is Yes. Try finding the other 99% and then maybe we can see.

&lt; Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. &gt;

Don't be THAT hard on yourself.

&lt; Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf. &gt;

Don't you wish? "It is not the sound of triumph, nor is it the sound of defeat; but the sound of singing I hear (Exodus 32:18)." A crowd can be singing "Danny Boy," "Young at Heart," "Love Me Tender," or "Rancho Grande," and it is not the sound of triumph or defeat, but the sound of singing. Don't that say alot about 'style?'

&lt; Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him. &gt;

It is, huh? In I Samuel 16-19 it says the evil spirit departed when David "played the harp with his hand." Ain't that a lot of details about style? Had it been Harpo Marx, who also played harp with his hand, would it have worked too?

&lt; There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it? &gt;

The living creatures and the elders around the throne each had a harp and sang a "new song." Ain't that a "definite style?"

&lt; Your idea is to force the world’s music into heaven. &gt;

I have no *idea* of forcing ANYTHING into heaven, as if that were possible. Your false accusations are stupefying.

&lt; I say this only to point out the truth of God’s Word, and not meaning and personal offence to you, but: You are an adulterer. &gt;

You stoopid sludgehead, what are your plans? to stone me?

&lt; CCM is married to the world and you, if your saved are married to Christ. &gt;

"Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, 'Jesus is accursed''; and no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,'' except by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 12:3)." If a song proclaims Jesus as Lord, the scripture says that can not be said *except by the Holy Spirit." Do you say otherwise?

As to your idea of loving ['being married to'] the things of the world, you need to be asked: If you own a car, do you wash it, vacuum it, wax it, try to keep it free from scratches? Are you *loving a thing of the world* if you do these? You obviously have access to one or more computers-- do you *love* them? Do you select foods without regard to your taste? If you claim you do not use and enjoy many things of this world only [not the next], you are a liar. Your use of this principle is a front to slam someone else's tastes which differ from your own. And incidentally that person who differs in 'taste' would not be myself the vast majority of the time.

Are you a coward to answer this question? ... Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?

[Daniel]

OPEN NOTE TO ROCKFORT AND DHK: please stop it! You guys are accomplishing nothing by this back and forth slam-fest. I have repeatedly wanted to post from a reasoned, Biblical POV; however,I have been grieved in my spirit and literally shut-down from posting because of the cyber-tomatoes being hurled at each other. What are you accomplishing? Have you noticed that rlvaughn (starter of this thread) hasn't posted either? Do you think this is a coincidence? I hope we can see a reasonable tempering in the upcoming posts. Please consider this appeal. Thank you, fellows.

[ July 24, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[ July 24, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Eric, can you honestly say in your heart that the new song that they are singing in verse nine, and the worship of the lamb in verses 12-14, is all done to the beat of rock music, or even has the remote possibility of being sung to rock music?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody ever said it was "rock music". That's just a straw man. Just what is "rock music anyway? As I say on my page: "They make all of music seem so black-and-white, like it's a choice between "rock" and everything else. But then "rock" as they define it is &lt;B&gt; a very broad category,&lt;/B&gt; including hard and soft rock, and even R&B, disco and jazz are apart of it. Basically, "rock" is another word for...music with [certain] elements, such as the beat."
Remember, the main issue is the assumption that only classical and "traditional" styles meet "Biblical principles". Once again, you read of "harps" in these verses, and immediately think of mellow classic type music. That is the mistake you are making. Then you challenge us "was that rock", and without mentioning it, the imnference is that it really must have been classical/traditional. After all, as I said, the battle is between rock and traditional, as if those were the ony styles to choose from. And "harp" means "classical", doesn't it? But a string instrument can be played many ways, (as the guitar). The harp has even appeared in rock and other pop music.

So no, I'm not saying it was "rock", but the point is, is that it also didn't fit the criterion you and other critics judge music on-- that it's plain, with very diminished rhythm, and has no effect on the body (as in dancing), and that it had the form of what we call "hymns" today.

[DHK]

"As to your idea of loving ['being married to'] the things of the world, you need to be asked: If you own a car, do you wash it, vacuum it, wax it, try to keep it free from scratches? Are you *loving a thing of the world* if you do these? You obviously have access to one or more computers-- do you *love* them? Do you select foods without regard to your taste? If you claim you do not use and enjoy many things of this world only [not the next], you are a liar. Your use of this principle is a front to slam someone else's tastes which differ from your own. And incidentally that person who differs in 'taste' would not be myself the vast majority of the time."

"Are you a coward to answer this question? ... Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?"

I will gladly answer your questions and more. But I would hope that you would first understand the concept of "worldliness." I have posted these verses before, so I'll just give the references now: James 4:4; Romans 12:2; 1 John 2:15,16. There are other verses but these three ought to be sufficient. Every time I mention these verses and the subject worldliness you sidestep the entire issue by saying that everything is of the world--a copout. You then explain "Love not the world." Be not conformed to this world." "Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God." I will wait for your answer. But the above post will not do.
Yes, I have a car, own a computer, eat food, etc. And like everyone else I enjoy many things that God has provided for me. To God I am grateful, not to this world. It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. I don't owe a cent to this world. I owe it all to God. If it were not for Him I would not be here today, I would not be alive, I would not have salvation, and I would not have the privilege of explaining all this to you.
Having possessions does not make one worldly. It is your attitude toward those possessions that may cause you to be worldly. Can you do without them? Will they keep you from serving Christ? Will they keep you from growing closer to the Lord? What is the influence that your possessions will have on your life? That influence, of course, is determined largely by your attitude.
In reference to music, generally speaking, CCM mimics the world: talks like, walks like, acts like the world. You can't tell any difference. We have the Edmonton Trappers baseball team here, which is the farm team for the Minnesota Twins. Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. I can't remember the name of the band. If it wasn't worldly the world would not accept it. The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? Does your music conform to Christ, or to the world, which one?

Which do I prefer--a man singing "Amazing grace" traditionally who doesn't mean it, or one who sings rock and had been freed from drugs...? Neither one.
In the first scenario, a very common one I would admit, I would encourage the person to think about what he is singing. Most Christians fall into that trap; they don't think about the words they are singing, and most of the time they don't really mean it when they do. For example, when you sing "I surrender all," have you? "Make me a channel of blessing," Do you really mean it. "Send the light, Send the light" Are you the one willing to be sent? I am speaking here to all Christians. There is a need to think about the words that we sing, and perhaps not sing them if we can't sing them from our own heart.
In the second scenario, I would rather that God would put a new song in his heart, not the old rock of the world. A new believer needs to get the world out of him. "Old things are passed away; all things are become new." He is a new creature in Christ. Why hang on to the old worldly music? If God can free him from drugs, I know God can free him from rock as well.

DHK

[hugo]

DHK,

Do you think that in Heaven we will be doing what Ps150 says "praise Him with the timbrel and dance?"

The timbrel or tabret was a drumlike instrument. Cymbals are mentioned too.

Don't know if "rock" will be up there, but there will probably be drums and a beat and it will be spiritual. Matter of fact, I think every kind of music known to man will be put to use praising Jesus.

Viva Voce rocks
hugo

[DHK]

“Do you think that in Heaven we will be doing what Ps150 says "praise Him with the timbrel and dance?"
The timbrel or tabret was a drumlike instrument. Cymbals are mentioned too.
Don't know if "rock" will be up there, but there will probably be drums and a beat and it will be spiritual. Matter of fact, I think every kind of music known to man will be put to use praising Jesus. “

6. LIVING VOICES SHALL TAKE UP THE FAILING SOUNDS OF DEAD INSTRUMENTS, AND AS THEY CEASE ON EARTH, THOSE OF INTELLIGENT RANSOMED SPIRITS AND HOLY ANGELS, AS WITH THE SOUND OF MIGHTY THUNDERS, WILL PROLONG ETERNALLY THE PRAISE, SAYING: "ALLELUIA! SALVATION, AND GLORY, AND HONOR, AND POWER, UNTO THE LORD OUR GOD;" "ALLELUIA! FOR THE LORD GOD OMNIPOTENT REIGNETH." AMEN!

Verse 1. Praise God in his sanctuary. The Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, and the eastern versions, render it, "in his holy ones"; among his saints, in the assembly of them, where he is to be feared and praised: it may be translated, "in his Holy One", and be understood of Christ, as it is by Cocceius ... Some render it, "for" or "because of his holiness." The perfection of holiness in him; in which he is glorious and fearful in the praises of, and which appears in all his works of providence and grace. --John Gill.
Verse 2. Praise him for his mighty acts. Here is a reason for praise. In these deeds of power we see himself. These doings of his omnipotence are always on behalf of truth and righteousness. His works of creation, providence, and redemption, all call for praise; they are his acts, and his acts of might, therefore let him be praised for them.
Praise him according to his excellent greatness. His being is unlimited, and his praise should correspond therewith. He possesses a multitude or a plenitude of greatness, and therefore he should be greatly praised. There is nothing little about God, and there is nothing great apart from him. If we were always careful to make our worship fit and appropriate for our great Lord how much better should we sing! How much more reverently should we adore! Such excellent deeds should have excellent praise.
Verse 3. Trumpet: The name shophar means bright or clear, and the instrument may be conceived to have been so called from its clear and shrill sound, just as we call an instrument a "clarion", and speak of a musical tone as "brilliant" or" clear." In the service of God this shophar, or trumpet, was only employed in making announcements, and for calling the people together in the time of the holy solemnities, of war, of rebellion, or of any other great occasion. The strong sound of the instrument would have confounded a choir of singers, rather than have elevated their music. (John Kitto.) The shophar is especially interesting to us as being the only Hebrew instrument whose use on certain solemn occasions seems to be retained to this day.
The "psaltery" was a ten stringed instrument. It is constantly mentioned with the "harp." The psaltery was struck with a plectrum, the harp more gently with the fingers. Psaltery and harp speak to us in figure of "law and gospel." --Thomas Le Blanc.
Verse 4. Praise him with the timbrel and dance. Associated with the deliverance at the Red Sea, this form of worship set forth the most jubilant and exultant of worship. The hands and the feet were both employed, and the entire body moved in sympathy with the members. Are there not periods of life when we feel so glad that we would fain dance for joy? Let not such exhilaration be spent upon common themes, but let the name of God stir us to ecstasy. Let us exult as we cry,
"In the heavenly Lamb thrice happy I am,
And my heart it doth dance at the sound of his name."
There is enough in our holy faith to create and to justify the utmost degree of rapturous delight. If men are dull in the worship of the Lord our God they are not acting consistently with the character of their religion.
Praise him with stringed instruments and organs. We have here the three kinds of musical instruments: timbrels, which are struck, and strings, and pipes; let all be educated to praise the Lord. Nothing is common and unclean: all may be sanctified to highest uses. Many men, many minds, and these as different as strings and pipes; but there is only one God, and that one God all should worship. The word translated "organs" signifies pipe -- a simpler form of wind instrument than the more modern and more elaborate organ. Doubtless many a pious shepherd has poured out gracious pastorals from a reed or oaten pipe, and so has magnified his God.
Verse 4. Stringed instruments. Minnim (which is derived from a root signifying "division", or" distribution", hence strings) occurs in Psalms 45:8, and Psalms 150:4, and is supposed by some to denote a stringed instrument, but it seems merely a poetical allusion to the strings of any instrument. Thus, in Psalms 45:8, we would read, "Out of the ivory palaces the strings (i.e. concerts of music) have made thee glad"; and so in Psalms 150:4, "Praise him with strings (stringed instruments), and ugabs." --John Kitto.
Verse 5. Praise high upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. Let the clash of the loudest music be the Lord's: let the joyful clang of the loftiest notes be all for him. Praise has beaten the timbrel, swept the harp, and sounded the trumpet, and now for a last effort, awakening the most heavy of slumberers, and startling the most indifferent of onlookers, she dashes together the disks of brass, and with sounds both loud and high proclaims the glories of the Lord.
Verse 5. Loud cymbals ... high sounding cymbals. This important passage clearly points to two instruments under the same name, and leaves us to conclude that the Hebrews had both hand cymbals and finger cymbals (or castanets), although it may not in all cases be easy to say which of the two is intended in particular texts. --John Kitto.

Verse 6. Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord. "Let all breath praise him": that is to say, all living beings. He gave them breath, let them breathe his praise. His name is in the Hebrew composed rather of breathings than of letters, to show that all breath comes from him: therefore let it be used for him. Join all ye living things in the eternal song. Be ye least or greatest, withhold not your praises. What a day will it be when all things in all places unite to glorify the one only living and true God! This will be the final triumph of the church of God.

Praise ye the LORD. Once more, Hallelujah! Thus is the Psalm rounded with the note of praise; and thus is the Book of Psalms ended by a glowing word of adoration. Reader, wilt not thou at this moment pause a while, and worship the Lord thy God? Hallelujah!

This is a very long post, but I think an exposition of this psalm is warranted at this point. Most of this information came from Spurgeon’s “Treasury Of David.” Many commentators agree that there are no drums in the worship of Jehovah; in the worship of Satan, idols, and false gods yes, but in the worship of Jehovah—no. I don’t know where you are getting your information from, but you sounds like you could use some good commentaries, and perhaps some other helps will do like Greek and Hebrew lexicons, etc. There are no drums mentioned in this Psalm.
As for dancing, it amazes me how the CCM, new evangelicals, and charismatics, can take such a leap of faith from David’s “dance,” which is nothing more than leaping for joy, and apply that to the modern dance that you have to today’s rock bands. Incredulous! Amazing! David leapt for joy. He didn’t rock to the tunes of dctalk.
As for dance in heaven, where do you get such ideas. Read again Revelation 4 and 5. They worshipped the lamb—in fact the “bowed down and worshipped the lamb; the fell down before him in adoration and worship. That’s hardly dancing is it. They cast their crowns before Him, in an act of worship and adoration, respectfully, and reverently. You are not going to come before the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords swaying your hips to jazz, or rocking to the beat of CCM. “Every knee shall bow…”
Think about this also. David said every kind of musical instrument. Of course, as one commentator put it, he meant every kind of sacred musical instrument. But that thought aside, what makes you think that these same musical instruments (especially the ones used today)will be in heaven? I suppose many carnal Christians, who think John Denver is a Christian, believe that at the resurrection, he will be resurrected with his guitar in his hand. Do you think that you can take your piano, guitar, drums, etc. to heaven with you? Our minds are finite. God is infinite. How can a finite mind understand an infinite God? Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, we have no understanding what heaven is really like. What makes man think that God is going to accept man’s carnal inventions into heaven? Don’t you think that he will have something better prepared for us? “I go to prepare a place for you.” Yes, a better one, praise God.
DHK

[Daniel]

What you just posted, DHK, was what I've been waiting for for the last several pages. This is the path we need to be on. Let's ALL walk therein! Let's keep away from the personal assaults like the ones we referred to and were disgusted by in the earlier posts on this thread. Now we can get somewhere, regardless of our persuasion! Keep it going brethren! We are now getting back to the title of this thread--Biblical Principles for Church Music. Hallelujah!

[hugo]

DHK,

"timbrels, which are struck"

As your quote said, all instruments may be sanctified for spiritual uses.

You shouldn't make the mistake of claiming that since everyone was bowing down in worship in that passage in Rev that all we'll be doing for eternity is bowing down.

Again I fail to see how any particular sound or combination of sounds produced on earthly instruments is inherently evil.

That any sound is associated with evil is only due to the fact that man has used it for an evil purpose. Stripped of its evil use, I believe any sound or music can be sanctified and used for the glory of God.

The problem here is not the music but weak christians whose conscience won't let them enjoy music which they once only associated with evil (Rom 14). I can sympathize and will accomodate them when necessary but I refuse to be imprisoned by those who want to judge my liberty in Christ.

make a joyful noise
hugo

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. I can't remember the name of the band. If it wasn't worldly the world would not accept it. The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "world" does like classical music, only it's a different segment and generation of the world from the one that likes rock. Watch atheistic science/nature shows on TV, and you'll see they often use classical styles.
BJU and other fundamentalists schools are rejected more for their own follies than because of Christ. In other words, it's not their faithfulness to God's Word that is causing them to be despised, but their UNfaithfulness to it, which is causing unnecessary offense. (See Rom.2:24) 1 Peter 4:15 shows that we can "suffer" for our own sins. Yet people always take that as proof they must be right. The Jehovah's Witnesses also frequently qoute "The World hates us because we are of the truth", when in reality, the world is annoyed at them because they bug people at their door, and shove their literature in their face. We are annoyed at them for their false doctrine.
Likewise, just because rock styles may get more of a cheer than classical and especially dry old hymn styles doesn't automatically make the former wrong and the latter right. The latter style is heavily influenced by an unnatural, unscriptural platonic rejection of feelings that was prevalent in the Church of the past. This is not right, and their must be some balance in our music. If we are truly faithful to the Word of God, then those in the world who are not being led by the Spirit will continue to despise us, yet some will see the light in us and start to be led to Christ. Let us not try to get in the Spirit's way by making up our own ideas of what is associated with Christ, that are not even in the Bible.
We don't know which group was mentioned, and there are many that cross the line with some of the gimmicks, and may cross over into a secular audience (Didn't U2 start out as a "Christian" group? Stryper may be right behind them). I'm not condoning all of this, but remember, the style and beat is what this argument is about. Just because some may go overboard doesn't prove this whole point that anything with a certain beat is bad, or your insistence that a harp in the Bible proves it is advocating classical styles.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for dancing, it amazes me how the CCM, new evangelicals, and charismatics, can take such a leap of faith from David’s “dance,” which is nothing more than leaping for joy, and apply that to the modern dance that you have to today’s rock bands. Incredulous! Amazing! David leapt for joy. He didn’t rock to the tunes of dctalk.
As for dance in heaven, where do you get such ideas. Read again Revelation 4 and 5. They worshipped the lamb—in fact the “bowed down and worshipped the lamb; the fell down before him in adoration and worship. That’s hardly dancing is it. They cast their crowns before Him, in an act of worship and adoration, respectfully, and reverently. You are not going to come before the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords swaying your hips to jazz, or rocking to the beat of CCM. “Every knee shall bow…”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody's saying that the dancing in the Bible or in Heaven is exactly like rock or jazz. But the point is, it appears not to be like the old hymns, either. As Rockfort said:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Old time music lends itself more to contemplation. CCM lends itself more to excitation. Neither one is inherently spiritual are they? It takes context and words to establish the spirituality or worldliness of a song. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There may be some contemplative singing when we fall down before Him (But it will still probably be more alive than many of those old hymns, and it's not the words I'm talking about, but the music styles traditionalist churches put to them.

But also, joyous lively music will have its place as well, as it was used for celebration. What you need to do is go back and look at the links that you and others have posted. The critics all claim there is to be absolutely no fleshy pleasure in the music at all. That means, not even David's leaping for joy would be acceptable. Be consistent, here! Don't the critics constantly put down charismatics who leap for joy? This is not "sensuous rock/jazz dancing (and charismatic churches have been the loudest critics of that) even though I would admit that alot of them go way overboard.
"Flesh" is totally misunderstood as purely the physical body (when in the Bible it refers to our fallen nature, which often manifests itself in physical bodily "sins"). This includes pride, and in many people that contemplative "traditional" music evokes feelings of "pride" (at making one "civilized" or "cultured" or being superior to the lively music of the "barbarians"). This is just as much of "the flesh". My father (who is not saved) used to say "hey, if they want to just sit there and get their intellectual kick out of that plain music, that's good for them, but I want to boogie". Which is really better? And the fact that lively music that does elicit a physical reation is used, the whole contention is flawed. SO once, again, it is not "rock", but it is also more than the dry, often dead medieval to early 20th century styles that CCM critics seem to advocate

[Rockfort]

&lt; Yes, I have a car, own a computer, eat food, etc. And like everyone else I enjoy many things that God has provided for me. &gt;

That statement ends one phase of all this rot. You are enjoying things of this world, while "friendship with the world is enmity with God." If you claim this is not "friendship with the world," this just shows you attach that lable only to things you personally do not care for. YOU ain't that standard, bud.

&lt; It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. &gt;

Yeah? Quit your job or any income-earning business and give all your money away, then see if these "funds" are still there and coming in.

&lt; In reference to music, generally speaking, CCM mimics the world &gt;

Any music "mimics" the world because we have no music outside of the world. We could not play it or hear if such were not done through natural [worldly] means.

&lt; You can't tell any difference. &gt;

I once heard of [did not hear it live] a song performed on latenight television which mocked the idea of the gospel and the second coming with the line, "Some say beware, but I don't care!..." Can YOU tell no difference between this and "We Shall Behold Him," or "My Deliverer is Coming?" You are a sorry mushbrain if you can tell no difference between a song which proclaims the gospel and one which mocks it.

&lt; Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. ...The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? &gt;

A chorale group from my church was invited to sing the national anthem and a song of their choice at a major league game. So what would you chew at in relation to that?-- that they are being "friends of the world" by singing at a ballgame or by singing the national anthem?

&lt; Which do I prefer--a man singing "Amazing grace" traditionally who doesn't mean it, or one who sings rock and had been freed from drugs...? Neither one...In the second scenario, I would rather that God would put a new song in his heart, not the old rock of the world. A new believer needs to get the world out of him. "Old things are passed away; all things are become new." &gt;

"Amazing Grace" would be that NEW SONG to such a person described. Again you seek to omit the actual core of the statements in those verses we have discussed, which is, "SPEAK TO ONE ANOTHER in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." It is the WORDS which matter, by which we speak. And that is what this newly saved person-- a true person and a friend of mine; and not a hypothetical person, I might add-- is doing. He may not be doing it according to YOUR style, but that simply comes back to I Corinthians 12:3, which says he could not proclaim the Lordship of Jesus Christ-- which he does-- "except by the Holy Spirit." John Newton, who wrote "Amazing Grace," was saved from his defiance of God and his trading slaves (if my info is correct), and this other person was saved from drug addiction and promiscuity...but your concern is music style. If they don't sing and play music your way, then does that prove they are still "of the world" and not saved? You have not yet said it just that way, and that is why I am asking.

[DHK]

Rockfort:
“Love not the world.”
“Be not conformed to the world.”
“Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”
Not once have you even attempted to give an explanation of these verses. Do they even exist in your Bible? What do they mean to you, if every thing is of the world? God puts an obvious distinction between worldly things and spiritual things, even in music. Please explain these verses. Don’t hide behind the bushes any longer!

&lt; It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. &gt;
“Yeah? Quit your job or any income-earning business and give all your money away, then see if these "funds" are still there and coming in.”

I would challenge you to do the same. The problem with most Westernized Christians is that they do not know how to live by faith. They have every thing handed to them: a secure job and income that gives them food to eat and a roof over their head, as well as their other various other needs and wants.
Jesus said, “Deny yourself, take up your cross daily, and follow me.” Are you willing to do that?
In 1983 the Lord called us to Pakistan. We spent a year and a half on deputation and raised $700.00 per month support. On that support, in July of 1984, we left (my wife, two-year old son, and myself) for the nation of Pakistan. Just a few weeks before, we sold everything we had at a garage sale—everything, including things that meant a lot to us given at our wedding. Yes, I had quit my “income-earning job,” given or sold everything , that we might pay for our tickets over there. Ask any reputable mission board if $700.00 per month is enough to live on for a family of four even in Pakistan. Most recommend about $2,000.00. I say a family of four because my wife was six months pregnant at the time. We arrived in a nation where we did not understand the language, the culture, and even the food was so much different. Temperatures were reaching toward 50 degrees Celsius or 120 Farenheit. Have you ever come to the place in your life, Rockfort, where you have had to pray, even travail in prayer, that God would provide something so essential as a refrigerator? We have. It is God that provides our needs, not the world. It is God that provides our “daily bread,” not the world. Or, don’t you believe in that prayer? We stayed in Pakistan for seven years until the Gulf War broke out and had to come home. I am still supported as a missionary, work as a missionary, just on a different mission field now. Our income has not increased substantially. We still trust the Lord. He still provides, even for the most basic of things. But most people, even Christians don’t understand this—they don’t understand what it is to live a life of faith. Try to explain that to a banker when applying for a mortgage on a house!! My God owns the cattle on a thousand hills, the wealth in every mine; He owns the rivers and the rocks and rills; The sun and stars that shine. Wonderful riches more than tongue can tell, He is my Father, so their mine as well He owns the cattle on a thousand hills, I know that He will care for me.
DHK

[Daniel]

DHK: I knew from reading your posts that you had learned to trust the Lord. This weak, sick, anemic generation of Christians don't have the foggiest idea what it means to trust the Lord. I am including myself in that lot! Yes, I have been in full-time Christian service for 18 years, but I've never had to trust the Lord to the level you and your family have had to learn such trust. Thanks for your testimony. It's good to sometimes step back from the back-and-forth barrage so characteristic of baptistboard and look at something far bigger than ourselves and our puny opinions. Thanks for throwing some light into the dark tunnel of this thread. Glory to God!!!

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> “Love not the world.”
“Be not conformed to the world.”
“Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”
Not once have you even attempted to give an explanation of these verses. Do they even exist in your Bible? What do they mean to you, if every thing is of the world? God puts an obvious distinction between worldly things and spiritual things, even in music. Please explain these verses. Don’t hide behind the bushes any longer <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is one:
(from my page: http://members.aol.com.etb700/ccm.html/appendixScriptures on Separation

1 John 2:15, 16-- "Love not the world, nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but of the world." This verse had always been used by pietist preachers to forbid all "worldly entertainments", such as movies, shows, TV, etc., (no matter how clean it might have been). But this interpretation is based on the idea of liking the things of the world. The Greek word translated "love" that basically means "like" is phileo. But the word used in this passage is agape! The same word used in John 3:16, about God loving the world enough to give His only Son. Also, passages that tell us to love one another (John 15:12), and even our enemies (Matt.5:44). So God is basically telling us not to love the world as He did love it when giving us His Son, or as we are to love one another. And even our enemies! This right here seems to contradict John's statement, but all of these are sacrificial love, or an all-out kind of love. So what it seems to be saying is not to live for the world (and the context mentions the world passing away(next verse). We are to dedicate our lives to God and our fellow brothers, and to sacrificially give to individual enemies, but not to the world SYSTEM. (The word translated "world" is kosmos (adorning), not aeon(age).) So the 1st John passage is aimed at Christians who are TOO enmeshed in the things of the world, but does not say you can't like anything in the world. (1 Cor.7:33 calls marriage and its responsibilities "things of the world", but we are not to shun that are we?)

Now, James 4:4 does tell us not to be "friends" of the world, and friend and friendship are forms of phileo, but the context is talking about wanting the things of the world so much that it causes conflict with others, especially the brethren. So as with 1 John, it is telling us not to put the world before the church, or let it cause you to offend people.

Finally, there is Rom.12:2--"be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind". (this time "world" is translated from "age".) The word conform means "to fashion alike", or conform to the same pattern. So this is not talking about anything as superficial as the sound of the music (unless it is really crosses a certain line, such as acid rock). It is talking about our basic philosophy and general direction in life (the true meaning of "new song"), as well as our behavior as far as the explicit commands of God are concerned.

[fwbbcflames]

DHK,

Great post! I am student at Bible College who is most likely going to be a home missionary. Just reminded me of how little I really trust God. I know this is not the topic of discussion here, but God spoke to me through what you wrote. Just wanted to let you know, don't really know why. I just felt led to do so. ;)

[DHK]

Quote:
"Finally, there is Rom.12:2--"be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind". (this time "world" is translated from "age".) The word conform means "to fashion alike", or conform to the same pattern. So this is not talking about anything as superficial as the sound of the music (unless it is really crosses a certain line, such as acid rock). It is talking about our basic philosophy and general direction in life (the true meaning of "new song"), as well as our behavior as far as the explicit commands of God are concerned."

There is light at the end of the tunnel, Eric. Frist, music, or the sound thereof, is not superficial. It is very important, important enough that God deemed it necessary in Heaven. It is not superficial. Concerning its sound, the Bible says in 1 Cor.14:8 "For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" Music gives either a certain or an uncertain sound.
And, there is an obvious line to be drawn. The question is, "Where do you draw the line?" You drew a line at acid rock. How many other types of rock cross your line? When we cross that line, we are fashioning ourselves, conforming ourselves in the same way or pattern that the world does. That is what I have been trying to say all along. Most of CCM is an imitation or a conforming to the world's music. Christian's are supposed to be different. Be not conformed to this world, rather "be conformed to the image of his son" (Rom. 8:29).
DHK

[Rockfort]

&lt; “Love not the world.”
“Be not conformed to the world.”
“Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” &gt;

There are far more people *of the world* than *of God*. Do you refuse to love them, as they are the very essence of that part of the world opposed to God?

&lt; Just a few weeks before, we sold everything we had at a garage sale- &gt;

Why didn't you GIVE it away instead of selling it? You don't have THAT much faith, apparently.

&lt; everything, including things that meant a lot to us given at our wedding. &gt;

Were these "things that meant a lot to [you]" *things of the world*?

&lt; Have you ever come to the place in your life, Rockfort, where you have had to pray, even travail in prayer, that God would provide something so essential as a refrigerator? &gt;

No, and a refridgerator is not that essential. People lived without them for thousands of years.

&lt; It is God that provides our needs, not the world... I am still supported as a missionary, work as a missionary, just on a different mission field now. &gt;

Specifically, by what means does God give you your food, or build your shelter, or drop that refridgerator down to you? When you say "I am still supported as a missionary," are you saying there are people or organizations of people who supply these things, or does God just make them appear?

&lt; He still provides, even for the most basic of things. &gt;

Like the car and computer you previously mentioned that you own and enjoy [be they worldly things or not]?

&lt; It is very important, important enough that God deemed it necessary in Heaven. &gt;

Cite the verse that says "God deemed it [music] necessary in Heaven."

&lt; Most of CCM is an imitation or a conforming to the world's music. Christian's are supposed to be different. &gt;

Besides the fact that all the music we have is "the world's music" because we live in the same world in which it exists and it is all sensed through the same means, consider the Elizabethan melody most commonly thought of as "Greensleeves." That tune has long been adapted to a popular 'Christmas' song, "What Child is This?" Is that an evil song to sing in church because it is an "imitation" of the "world's music?"-- not a "spiritual song" as first conceived, and therefore UNspritual, being 'copied' as you claim 'CCM' does.

&lt; Christian's are supposed to be different. &gt;

If the world wears shorts, T-shirts, business suits, jeans, and sneakers or leather shoes-- just what are Christians supposed to wear to be *different*? Does that car you mentioned owning look and drive differently from others? If so, does it meet your arbitrary line of being different enough? It is safe to assume you cannot tell a Christian from a block away because they will not look different. You have no reason to begin to believe a stranger is a Christian until he says so. If he says "Jesus is Lord," the scripture says he cannot say that except by the Holy Spirit-- no restrictions on what tone or rhythm in which he says it.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And, there is an obvious line to be drawn. The question is, "Where do you draw the line?" You drew a line at acid rock. How many other types of rock cross your line? When we cross that line, we are fashioning ourselves, conforming ourselves in the same way or pattern that the world does. That is what I have been trying to say all along. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, remember, the line is fuzzy. I think that any type of rock with excessive noise, and all sorts of hellish moaning, screaming is not good, and unchristlike. Others may not see it that way, and I would dissagree with them and wonder how anyone could use that for Christ. Terry Watkins (av1611.org) is the most hostile critic of CCM/rock, yet on his site, the music ministry he advocates uses a country sound! Even the other critics point out "If rock&roll=sex, country is the guilty afterglow". Yet, Watkins, who blasts the "wickedness" of "wordly styles" thinks this sound is OK, and I don't see any oth the other critics getting on him about it.
But the main issue is not the noise, but rather the beat or rhythm. Milder forms of rock, as well as jazz, and everything else with a similar beat are all lumped into the same pot as the satanic acid groups, and more emphasis is actually placed on the beat and syncopation, than on the hellish noise! This is what I regard as "superficial".

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Most of CCM is an imitation or a conforming to the world's music. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This I can even agree with, as far as certain things beyond the sound! in fact, before I joined this debate with the anti-CCM crowd, I was generally critical of the industry, for all the fame and fortune. Seeing how they are coming under such attack by people who think only old stuff is good, I have become more defensive of them. But I still question things I see, and wonder if some people are only "trying out" certain styles and gimmicks just because it sells. This I can agree with all of you, is worldly.
Often, you can tell it's shallow. But that doesn't mean that there can't be some who use a pop style, and it's genuine. The first Christian rap I heard sounded corny because it was just people adopting the style to try and sell to Christians from an urban background. But the lesser known ministries such as the Storytellers, the Cross Movement and a couple of others are much more genuine, as the Storytellers, rather than trying to adopt a style and squeeze a Christian message into it, are from the rough streets of the Bronx, and are communicating in the language that is common in that environment. Not only is their message real, it's scriptural. (people criticize rap as "arrogant", but it reminds me alot of the old fiery preaching that these critics hold up as as good. The only difference is the beat and that the words rhyme) But if you say it's all bad because of the beat, or all the ungodly secular raps, or the general distaste and bad association by a Conservative Christian culture that is far removed from that, then what are you leaving me with? Just classical and old hymns? What we are trying to say when we argue with you about the "world" is that just as you may associate rap with black hoodlums, and rock with rebelling white hippies, I associate the old styles with a culture that had my people in chains, and then when forced to free us, still spat on us. And their own families they overdominated, and sex was viewed as evil, even in marriage, etc. Yet, they thought this was all "biblical", and just as long as you obeyed social mores, went to "Bible preaching churches" and believed the doctrines, you were a good Christian. But this was just as much "the World" as the modern society that would later rebel against this old order. Yet, in fundamentalist writings, everything associated with that old society is seen as "of God", and eveything that differs with is is "the world". This is what we are trying to say: we are all from "the world", and anything we "bring into the church" is from the world, but in order to consider whether it is fit for use, we cannot just cite scriptures against "the world". We have to find that it truly does violate God's commands.
For an issue like this, which is based purely on a person's associations (subjective), the only real Biblical treatment of it is in scriptures like Romans 14 and 1 Cor 8, where the issues of meats offered to idols and vegetarianism (which are the same types of issues) were treated.
Maybe if we approach CCM with this in mind, we might get somwhere and make the Christian acid/thash metal bands and the commercialized leaders see our point.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If the world wears shorts, T-shirts, business suits, jeans, and sneakers or leather shoes-- just what are Christians supposed to wear to be *different*? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Suits and ties on men, and a certain style of long dresses on women. (David Cloud even recently criticized the Calvary Chapels for the pastors being dressed caually
How this (especially the suit and tie) is "different from the world", and is thus practically sacred garment is beyond me. (just think of all the ungodly business men, politicians, --like Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, media moguls, etc) I guess just because it is "traditonal" it is good, even though the ungodly leaders just happened to have held onto it. But I tend to feel Christian leaders, as authority figures should "look different" from that, since it is associated with the corrupt business and political world, and casual clothes are not.

[DHK]

"Specifically, by what means does God give you your food, or build your shelter, or drop that refridgerator down to you? When you say "I am still supported as a missionary," are you saying there are people or organizations of people who supply these things, or does God just make them appear?"

Yes, Rockfort, sometimes "God just makes them appear." But as I mentioned before, that is a difficult concept for many western Christians to understand because they have never lived a life of faith. They have never had to trust the Lord for anything past their own salvation. So I guess I wouldn't expect you to understand.
But surely you must believe the Scriptures: "Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not." (Jer.33:3)
God answers prayer. He provides. It is as simple as that.

"Besides the fact that all the music we have is "the world's music" because we live in the same world in which it exists and it is all sensed through the same means,"

--You're still dodging the true meaning of those verses (Rom.12:2; 1John 2:15,16; James 4:4), are you not? Give me your understanding of these verses, and then try and tell me truthfully and honestly that "all the music we have is ?the world's music.'"
When David used his harp to cast the demon out of Saul, was it the world's music that he used? Is Satan divided against himself? Would David use the music of "the god of this world" to ease Saul's soul and cast out the demon?
2Cor.10:3-5 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds ;)
5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

We are in a spiritual battle. Every imagination, high thing (even sound or music) must be brought into captivity, and every thought (including the thoughts generated by music) to the obedience of Jesus Christ. ALL MUSIC IS NOT WORLDLY MUSIC. We are in a spiritual battle. There is some music that can help you win that battle, and some music that will defeat you. The choice is yours.

The song writer put it this way:
I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus.
No turning back. No turning back.
The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me...
No turning back. No turning back.

"And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:62)
Put your eyes on Jesus. Leave the world behind. The closer you are to the Lord, and the farther you are from the world, the less of an issue CCM will be to you.
DHK

[Daniel]

Bravo, DHK, to that final point! The closer you are to God the less you want the rot of this world, most particularly the entertainment geared to the flesh. But, no doubt, you've heard of a brick wall? Keep, trying, though, brother!

[Rockfort]

&lt; Yes, Rockfort, sometimes "God just makes them appear." &gt;

So now you are claiming telekenesis! If you really think you have perceived such a thing as God *just making them appear*, I think you're either psychotic or on hallucinogens.

&lt; When David used his harp to cast the demon out of Saul, was it the world's music that he used? &gt;

The strings he plucked were worldly strings producing worldly sound waves perceived by the vibrations on worldly eardrums.

&lt; ALL MUSIC IS NOT WORLDLY MUSIC &gt;

Then cause me to hear, or sense, some UNworldly music right now. If you think God will make things appear out of thin air for you, He should do this simple thing if your analysis of 2 worlds is correct.

&lt; The song writer put it this way:
I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus.
No turning back. No turning back.
The cross before me, the world behind me. The cross before me, the world behind me...
No turning back. No turning back. &gt;

Great lyrics I have sung many times. But do you condemn these same lyrics if played and sung in a way which doesn't tickle your whimsy?

&lt; The closer you are to the Lord, and the farther you are from the world, the less of an issue CCM will be to you. &gt;

There seem to be few people for whom it is a greater *issue* than for you.

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The strings he plucked were worldly strings producing worldly sound waves perceived by the vibrations on worldly eardrums.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rockfort, I basically agree with what you're trying to say, but we're getting hung up on the word "wordly". You're suggesting it is a completely neutral term for our physical makeup. But it is true that in Scripture it represents something negative (as the critics are here using it)-- namely this present evil age, plus the fallen state of the physical cosmos incuding people with our sins that characterizes it. (See my discussion of the three passages and two meanings of "world" a few posts back; now on the prior page). The issue is SIN, not physical matter
So DHK and the critics are trying to associate CCM with sin (bad), not simply the physical world (neutral). Where they're wrong is in the poor biblical evidence that all styles with a certain beat are sinful, and thus indelibly connected with the fallen "world" [while only traditional styles are "unworldly" or "spiritual"]. Then our point comes through, that the traditional styles are from the world (sinful cultures of people, including "Conservative Christian" ones!) as well, and that Christ can redeeem things of the world. This is the answer to this back and forth wrangling over "the world".

[Daniel]

Thanks, Eric! I was wondering if Rockfort and DHK were lost in that quagmire! I was hoping to see DHK define his "worldly" away from the one Rockfort was trying to use. The two definitions weren't even related---the old "apples to oranges" comparison thing! Thanks for the light! (BTW--this argument is going no where fast! I would love to jump back in on the original topic, but have had no open door so far...here's hoping...)

[DHK]

"And be not conformed to this world."
--Romans 12:2

If a Christian can by possibility be saved while he conforms to this world, at any rate it must be so
as by fire. Such a bare salvation is almost as much to be dreaded as desired. Reader, would you wish to leave this world in the darkness of a desponding death bed, and enter heaven as a shipwrecked mariner climbs the rocks of his native country? then be worldly; be mixed up with Mammonites, and refuse to go without the camp bearing Christ's reproach. But would you have a heaven below as well as a heaven above? Would you comprehend with all saints what are the heights and depths, and know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge? Would you receive an abundant entrance into the joy of your Lord? Then come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing. Would you attain the full assurance of faith? you cannot gain it while you commune with sinners. Would you flame with vehement love? your love will be damped by the drenchings of godless society. You cannot become a great Christian--you may be a babe in grace, but you never can be a perfect man in Christ Jesus while you yield yourself to the worldly maxims and modes of business of men of the world. It is ill for an heir of heaven to be a great friend with the heirs of hell. It has a bad look when a courtier is too intimate with his king's enemies. Even small inconsistencies are dangerous. Little thorns make great blisters, little moths destroy fine garments, and little frivolities and little rogueries will rob religion of a thousand joys. O professor, too little separated from sinners, you know not what you lose by your conformity to the world. It cuts the tendons of your strength, and makes you creep where you ought to run. Then, for your own comfort's sake, and for the sake of your growth in grace, if you be a Christian, be a Christian, and be a marked and distinct one. SPURGEON

If, by the music that you listen to, by the speech that you use, and by the very conduct of your life, you were accused in a court of law of being a Christian, would the jury find you guilty?

[War_Eagle]

DHK,

If someone's judging my Christianity by the music I listen to, then he's misunderstood the point of Christianity.

[DHK]

If someone's judging my Christianity by the music I listen to, then he's misunderstood the point of Christianity.

The point of Christianity is not only to receive Christ as Saviour, but have a personal relationship with Him, and allow Him to change your life on a daily basis, so that every day you grow closer to Him, and become more like Him. The Christian life is not stagnant, it is vibrant; a vibrant living, holy walk with Him. We call this sanctification. Yes, the world will judge you by your music, and rightly so. And if you haven’t left that old ungodly style of music that you used to listen to in your unsaved days; that music that the world still listens to, they will say what’s the difference between him and us—there is none!!!
Most Christians have no concept of the meaning of Phil.1:29. Look this verse up. How does it apply to your life?
DHK

[War_Eagle]

DHK,

Again, if a non-Christian says, "what's the difference between him and us - there is none", based on preferred musical style, then he has misunderstood the entire point of Christianity.

Most of my friends are non-Christians, including four of the members of my band. (I know I'll get hammered for saying that here but that's another subject for another day.)

They know I'm a Christian and they know where I stand on many issues.

Several of them have told me that they do see a difference in me that comes from my realationship with Christ and some have come to me for help with all sorts of crises because they know that I genuinely care about them and that I'll always treat them with respect and compassion. A couple of them have told me that other Christians have made them feel like they're just another notch in a Bible.

Probably the same Christians who lectured them about the "evils" of rock and roll.

God has even allowed me to be a tool in leading some of them to Christ.

It's funny that the only people who seem to care about musical styles are some people here on Baptistboard and not non-Christians like you said.

In all my dealings with non-Christians, the issue of musical styles has never come up.

That's probably our fault, though. We must have spent too much time talking about grace and forgiveness.

[ July 30, 2001: Message edited by: War_Eagle ]

[Eric B]

Part of the problem in this phase of the argument, is that there are many different mindsets among the unsaved. We tend to lump them all in the same pot, but they are different from one another, and will think different about us, and be reached differently. Some may just hear the same style of music with Christian words. These people may not be that antagonistic to Christianity, so they won't care. It's still the same old rock they love and enjoy, and they may not listen to the words anyway. The same type of person would accept the traditional/classical sound if that were what they liked (remember, these styles were once popular and contemporary, and no, everyone in the society was not saved back then)
Some who are antagonistic to the faith will see it as different-- the Christian references and words about Christ and the Bible will stick out, along with the lack of sex, drugs, cursing, etc. and it will be the "same old religious stuff" to them. This is how I saw it when I was unsaved. Some may even see it as corny, and a cheap attempt to woo them into our belief system. (I saw it as that too). Then there is the much cited article "New Lyrics for the Devil's Music", which reflects the secular media's assumption that all Christians are "supposed" to be against everything modern, (this is what they've always called the music) and surprise that the church is actually changing, even if they may not be that impressed.
But if God begins leading them, the music might help them in the transition to faith. So as with all the other issues, we cannot generalize too much. Some people will see us as wordly no matter what we do. After all, we are all people in the world (What I guess Rockfort was trying to say), and even though Christians often act as though we're "up there" above everyone, they see all our sins regardless, so the whole issue of "different" people with "different" music is moot. The Bible speaks of "difference", but these people can't comprehend it, because it is spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). For this reason both approaches of trying to avoid styles to look "different", OR the depending on of the use of those styles as our means of winning people are misguided.
We are to depend on God to lead us in winning people. We are not to try to depend on devices or our own making, whether old styles or new. Then, they may see something in us, and that a wall has come down in our communication. They all know traditional society was not heaven, so it's about time Christians stop pretending it was. And they'll see that the modern ways need correction as well

[DHK]

"Most of my friends are non-Christians, including four of the members of my band."
--That is exactly your problem: the friends and the company that you keep. They will either lift you up spiritually or drag you down. You are not in Christian band at all, not if four members are not saved! No wonder you have a hard time telling the difference between worldly music and that which is spiritual. What does the Bible say:
Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
2 Cor.6:14-17 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

We don't go into the bars to witness to the drunks. I don't have to get high on drugs to witness to an addict. Neither do I have to be involved in the CCM movement, or any secular rock group (as you are), to be understood by them.

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

The world will know that we are Christians by our love for the brethren, not for the world.
DHK

[Daniel]

Bravo, DHK!

[War_Eagle]

DHK,

When did I ever say that I was in a Christian band? At the same time, I don't believe it's a "secular" band. "Secular" implies that God is not involved. Because I and piano/keyboard/accordion player, tom Owensby, are Christians, God is very much involved. If that's a problem for you, then I don't know what to tell you. I just think it's funny that you think you can "diagnose" us by nothing more than a few sentences over the internet from someone you've never met, then it's kind of hard to take you seriously.

It's not that I don't know what "worldly" music is, it's just that I don;t buy your definition of it.

Is it ever appropriate to use music to tell a story? Is it ever appropriate to use music to convey an idea or a feeling or an emotion?

Why is it wrong for me to write a song to tell my wife that I love her? Why is it wrong to use music to speak about social injustice?

"The world will know we are Christians by our love for the bretheren, not the world."

Interesting. I was attacked three times in a row by your buddy Daniel (with all of his "education and experience") and I'm being judged unfairly by you. Exactly when does all of this love of yours start?

So are you saying that we shouldn't show love to sinners? If that's true, then why did Jesus spend so much time with sinners? He was very loving in His interaction with them.

Thank God that the person who led me to Christ didn't listen to your advice.

[ July 31, 2001: Message edited by: War_Eagle ]

[ July 31, 2001: Message edited by: War_Eagle ]

[Daniel]

War Eagle...I am so sorry you felt attacked by me. I did not have that as an intent. I was just responding to some of the ways you were expressing yourself. Rather than having a civil "discussion," things had degenerated into a foolish back-and-forth "one-upping" of each other. I was just as guilty. God convicted me that I was being foolish. That's why I made an appeal for that stuff to stop. We must get away from personal attacks and get back to the issue at hand--Biblical Principles for Church Music, not personal opinions about Church Music. Let's keep the discussion going--civilly! It's still possible if we ALL try! ;)

[DHK]

War_Eagle,
"So are you saying that we shouldn't show love to sinners? If that's true, then why did Jesus spend so much time with sinners? He was very loving in His interaction with them."

Not at all! I spend time going out into the "highways and biways," that is going from door to door witnessing to the lost. I evangelize, preach, teach, witness, counsel, spend time in people's homes, spend time on the telephone--reaching out to the lost. Yes we ought to have a concern for sinners.
"The world will know we are Christians by our love for the bretheren, not the world."
That statement is almost word for word from the Bible.
John 13:35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
It is God your disagreeing with, not me. I'm just quoting His Word.
Agreed, there are many uses for music: love songs, children's stories, etc. But that's not what this forum is about. The title is "Biblical Principles for Church Music."
"Why is it wrong for me to write a song to tell my wife that I love her?" It isn't. It would just be entirely inappropriate to sing about her as a congregational hymn, and it would not be very edifying for the believers.
Eph.5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
DHK

[Daniel]

TWO WORDS TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN MAKING DECISIONS ON BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES FOR CHURCH MUSIC: APPROPRIATENESS (SEE DHK POST) AND ASSOCIATION (eg. having no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness; be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; etc.) FOOD FOR THOUGHT.....

[ August 01, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[War_Eagle]

DHK,

I know that this thread is "Bibical principles for Church Music". I never changed the topic to CCM, or mainstream music, I was just following the natural progression of the posts that preceded mine.

I am aware of John 13:35, thank you. I even did a study of it just for the purposes of trying to understand your posts better. Since I know that many people here are KJV only, I used a KJV.

There isn't any indication in any of my books or commentaries that loving "the bretheren" and loving pagans are mutually exclusive.

Therefore, I will continue to show Christ's love to non-Christians.

Just as I didn't say that I was in a Christian band, I never said that I disagreed with John 13:35, just your interpretation of it.

I also never said that any song I wrote for my wife (not married, that was just for the sake of the argument) was or wasn't suitable for congregational worship.

In fact, I think you might even be surprised by some of my views on "congregational" music.

I can't stand "worship choruses", I think most CCM is just dumb and I keep an old Baptist hymnal by my bed and read it sometimes for a devotional or just because. I love the great hymns of the faith. (Didn't see that coming, did you?)

I don't think our problem here is a disagreement over "being in the world but not of it" (I'm sure we both agree on that), rather what does it mean to be "in the world" as opposed to being "of the world".

I think that's great that you pass out tracts and go door to door. There's a need for that but that's not my ministry. God has called me to build relationships with people who need to know Him, be they Christian or not.

Who else needs a friend more than someone who is lost without Christ? Having been there, I can tell you, it's a lonely place to be.

In an earlier post you said something to the effect that if I sing mainstream music as well as Christian music, non-Christians will say "what's the difference between Christians and us." (I hope that's right. For some strange reason I can't review your past posts so I'm going from memory.)

It's interesting that the only people who seem to care are other Christians. It's been my experience that Non-Christians
are much more concerned with how Christians treat them than and couldn't really care less with the music we listen to.

The one exception being the non-Christians who tell me how cool it is that I feel secure enough in my walk with Christ that I can get up in a bar full of people and express my faith. A couple of people have even come to Christ because of that, one being my piano/keyboard/accordion player, Tommy Owensby. (One down four to go!)

Again, I'm not trying to change the topic here but you brought this up and I felt it should be addressed.

[ August 01, 2001: Message edited by: War_Eagle ]

[ August 01, 2001: Message edited by: War_Eagle ]

[War_Eagle]

By the way, evidently BaptistBoard's censorship software is a little overzelous. The word it blocked out wasn't dirty at all. Nor was it directed at anyone. In the context of the post, it was perfectly appropriate.

Weird, huh?

[DHK]

"In an earlier post you said something to the effect that if I sing mainstream music as well as Christian music, non-Christians will say "what's the difference between Christians and us." (I hope that's right. For some strange reason I can't review your past posts so I'm going from memory.)
It's interesting that the only people who seem to care are other Christians. It's been my experience that Non-Christians are much more concerned with how Christians treat them than and couldn't really care less with the music we listen to."

However, the non-Christians do care, very much, about what music you listen to. Recently the news reported the fastest growing segment of the music industry is CCM. It now has a good share of the market, whereas just a few years ago, it was almost an unknown in secular circles. Perhaps "Christian" artists are getting more professional at imitating the world's music! Perhaps there is no line any more as to what is Christian any more and what is not, after all-- "who listens to the words anyway, it's the beat that counts." And there are many that don't care what the words are, so long as the volume is turned up high and there is a good strong beat.
Does the world care? See for yourself. Take that old hymnal of yours and sing those songs instead to your band members. Suggest that for one week all the radio stations that play CCM play just those hymns that are in your hymnal. How much business do you think they would lose? Would they attract the world? That is the unsaved crowd and the saved that enjoy the "things of this world."
"What can wash away my sin, nothing but the blood of Jesus" just doesn't seem to be most people's favorite today. I wonder why.
DHK

[War_Eagle]

DHK,

When you said the first time that non-Christians care about the music we listen to, you were speaking of judgement. This time you're talking about a marketing label. Two different things entirely.

When some of my unsaved musician friends and I get together for bluegrass "sessions", we often play hymns. In fact, in bluegrass music they're a must. "Leaning on the Everlasting Arms", "What Would You Give in Exchange for You Soul", "Who Will Sing For Me", Are You washed in the Blood", "There is a Fountain Filled with Blood", etc.

Obviously, they view these from a much different perspective than I do but if they're as powerful as you and I believe they are, I think that they'll speak to my friends. I've had more than one "do you believe that stuff?" conversation as a result.

The problem with the radio station idea is that radio stations are in the business of making money, not ministry.

One of the reasons that non-Christians might not realate to the songs in my hymnal is that the most recent song is from the thirties.

Going by your logic, how many people do you know who listen to "I'm Looking Over a Four Leaf Clover" or "In the Good Old Summertime"?

The problem isn't the message, it's the music itself. After all, Randy Stonehill and Steve Taylor have huge non_Christian followings and their songs clearly present the Gospel as well as other Biblical themes in plain, modern language.

"A Mighty Fortress is Our God" is a wonderful song and I enjoy singing it in church but how many people today know what a bullwhark is?

[Dr. Bob]

I just spent 19 minutes going through all 9 pages of the "wanderings" of this thread. We cannot handle 10 pages, so I am LOCKING this thread at this point.

HOWEVER, there are a LOT of good points. I would encourage some of you to start a thread on ONE SPECIFIC ASPECT of the discussion. This will allow more to read and participate.

Okay? Well, even if not, this is over. :eek: