Discussion continued from "Would you give up your rock"

Can you show me any instance of music being used in worship by Christians in the New Testament?
I apply the regulative principle and believe we are commended to worship in spirit and in truth.

Aesthetic worship is not worshipping in spirit and in truth.

Anything which induces negative, sinful feelings is not OK. Eg. Self-pity, anger etc.

 

God created music. Therefore, He is glorified in music... vocal or not. It's true that music can be perverted to other means, but music that is used to glorify God cannot be wrong... rock music, classical music, or any other kind. Just because some music gives you a negative emotional response, doesn't mean it affects me the same way. The vice-versa is true as well. This discussion seems to me to be splitting hairs, and worse yet, splitting the Body on an issue that doesn't matter one iota to eternity. We may all be surprised (and I'll bet on it!) when we arrive in Heaven as to what is used to worship Him there. When God is lifted up, it does not matter what "style," "label," or "genre" we've boxed it into. If you don't like it, don't listen. Find a church where you can worship effectively. But do not call others intentions wrong or evil simply because it's different than what you like or approve of. That is asinine at best. Of course, this is just my opinion, and will probably be pulled apart by some here, and that's fine. That's your prerogative. Just know that this is what I believe... And I believe God builds His throne on the praise of His people... whether it includes a drum-beat, blues-riff, electric guitar, or organ.

Thank you.

 

Wow! What a statement.

In the beginning God created music to be a comfort and a joy to those who hear it. God provided the Psalms to be sung as
a sweet savour.

"Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;" Ephesians 5:19

But satan has taken that which God made beautiful and has perverted it to where there is no music to it. There is only a beat and indistinguishable words. This began in the 'sixties, as rock & roll. This music is sensual, devilish and perverts the mind of the children.

Many churches have allowed this perversion to enter into their worship services, calling it "christian rock". There is no such thing as christian rock. If it does not lift the spirit and soothe the soul, then it is ministering to the flesh; and the flesh is enmity against God, Romans 8:7.

Satan uses music to pervert. God uses music for praise and worship. Perhaps a Christian can be a musician for the Lord, or he can be perverted by the music of the devil.

God created music, therefore, He is glorified in music... give me a break!

It's a question of HOW you use music to glorify God, singing a few 'Here Kitty Kitty' lyrics over the music doesn't change it from satan's music to music that glorifies God.

Music which glorifys God will be distinguishable from music that ministers to the flesh.

Well if the vice-versa is true why don't you start treating me as a weaker brother?

SPLITTING HAIRS!, SPLITTING THE BODY!, Pardon me Joshua but you're obviously living in some kind of cocoon, if your only concern is seeing unity on the BB music forum you need to widen your horizons. The introduction of CCM to church worship services is one of the great causes of division in the Body of Christ, Christians on opposing sides of the debate MUST communicate with one another, burying your head in the sand in the name of meekness is NOT displaying brotherly love.

I'm sure you've used the word asinine intentionally, the meaning is not lost on me, thanks for your graciousness.

The problem has become so great that it is becoming almost impossible to find churches where true worship is adhered to. People like you are to thank for that.

Its not a question of personal taste, its a question of obeying the Word.

You just love trying to make the rest of us look judgemental don't you, this is a debate forum, every post is subject to being 'pulled apart' by those who disagree with it, that's the manner of debate and its difficult to allow such a weak post to go unquestioned. I hope I haven't dissapointed you.

And the basis of this belief, it wouldn't be that you enjoy drum-beats, blues-riffs and electric guitar would it. I enjoy those thing to, in the fleshly sense, but I prefer to worship in the manner that God commands.

That's the ironic thing about this debate, musicians like yourself are so obviously bound up in your personal preferences that you can't bear to be challenged on them, then you turn around and accuse people like me of arguing from a position of personal taste.

We are all weak in the flesh, and but for the grace of God I'd be right up there with you strumming the electric guitar.

You too.

Joshua, here is an article which might help you to understand where I'm coming from.

Ps.141:5 Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head: for yet my prayer also shall be (for them)in their calamities.

When someone confronts you about a sin or fault in such a way that you feel "caught", but the sin you are accused of looks SO defamatory that it frightens you; are you willing to yield and seek repentance out and away from your sin? Or are you more likely to be outraged, that some other "imperfect person" dares to find fault with you? When someone continues to remind you of your "besetting sin", can you just say "Amen, Lord have mercy", or do you seek opportunity for revenge? Do you invite reproof as a kindness, an excellent oil? Or do you like to think that only a self-righteous and critical person would ever dare to criticize you? Is it so, that anyone who dares to mention your "mote in your eye ", ought to be immediately reminded that their attempt to reprove you is only the evidence of the "beam in their own eye "?

Jesus prophesied, "Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold." One of the most visible evidences of the fulfillment of this prophecy is that even among Christians, reproof is not welcome. Do you ever submit to reproof from anyone who has no carnal power to punish you for resisting? Are you unwilling to confront anyone else for their sins or errors, unless you are sure that there is no way for them punish you for doing so? Do you "fellowship in the light", or are you party to a multitude of "unspoken agreements", in which you will tolerate someone else's faults and errors, if only they will tolerate YOURS?

If someone complains about the terrible circumstances of their life, almost everyone will volunteer to pray for them, but only so they can escape from the inquiry into WHY such trouble came. If, as is usually expected, there is no answer to their prayer, they can remember that they prayed and excuse themselves from any further involvement. Even if the connection between this person's sins and the consequences of his sins are clearly seen, there will probably be no open rebuke for fear of reprisals. If they face this troubled person again, they can always reassure them that God loves them, thereby making it "all God's fault", Who supposedly, didn't do anything to help. But what we really have here, is the case in which God did intervene by placing the word of correction in YOUR heart and mouth, even though He knew you wouldn't risk that other person's wrath by confronting them. So, in the end, you are judged as unfaithful and cowardly for failing to confront your brother, and the word of reproof is denied to the brother who needed to hear it because he was unteachable. Besides, it is now commonly held, that anyone who would be so bold as to point out to someone else their sins has no love, or is guilty of unrighteous judging.

Prov.15:31 The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise.


I do not consider myself to be above reproach, I want you to be clear about that. Taking the stand I do means that I suffer reproach on a regular basis here on the music forum. That doesn't bother me in the slightest, I don't care if it is open rebuke or wheather it is done in a holier than thou manner, I try to bear it when it is deserved and by God's grace I will continue to do so.

Be assured on one thing, I'm not in here for fellowship although despite our differences I do love the people who frequent this forum. I'm here to stand for what I believe to be Biblical truth and will continue to do so whilst there remains the slightest possibility that someone will be drawn back from what I percieve to be sin.

It will annoy you but I believe that people like yourself are corrupting the minds of other impressionable Christians, you come across as a very nice person and I'm aware that there are those who read the threads on the board who may be inclined to agree with you because of that, even though your position is unscriptural in my opinion.

This forum needs balance because the issues surrounding music are important, I will try to provide some balance, at least while Aaron is absent.

The keyword for people like yourself is TOLERANCE, you say we must all tolerate eavh others views and musical preferences. I hope you are able to tolerate my right, nay, my command to defend my position against what I consider to be willful disobedience to the Word of God.

 

Who are you to tell me what lifts my soul and soothes my soul? Or anyone for that matter? I don't understand how you can make statements like this. I know mothers who do the same thing by believing that everyone else in the house is cold if she is cold. This kind of mother makes everyone else put on a sweater, because SHE is cold. Just because it does nothing for you, DOES NOT MAKE IT EVIL OR "SATANIC."

I am able to tolerate it. And I appreciate your view. I guess I'll just agree to disagree with you. As far as the "Weaker Brother" comment, and the assumption that I am being judgmental, I will let these go unanswered. I see now what others have been trying to tell me about refuting other viewpoints. Please forgive me for disagreeing with you, Enda. It will not happen again. This is my last post in argument with you. And please, don't attribute my non-posts with agreement (or worse, that I'm running from you) I just see now that neither of us will change our viewpoint. It is pointless for me to continue in this discussion.

Thank you for a wonderful evening.

[ July 24, 2003, 09:56 PM: Message edited by: Joshua Rhodes ]

 

I can make statements like that because I have a thermometer (the Bible) When the thermometer says its freezing and the little child says its warm, out of love and concern for the child who obviously is lacks understanding about the dangers of the coldness,I will put on it's coat.

Now, if you wanted to challenge my position you'd have to prove I was reading the thermometer wrongly. It's easy to make a 'hit and run' post saying nothing more than "you're reading it wrongly in my opinion", thats not what good honest discussion involves, and I can see why you wouldn't want to engage me in serious debate.

It's obviously upset you that I challenged your last post, that's regrettable but necessary if we are ever to reach any middle ground as brothers in Christ.

As I said earlier ignoring the problem won't make it go away, whoever advised you to do so gave you bad advice. CCMer's and traditional hymn only Christians will never achieve real unity by concealing their differences and not addressing them openly and honestly as was the way of the Apostles.

Nevertheless, if you choose to avoid debate, for whatever reason, there's nothing I can do about that. But be aware that I consider this to be a wrong attitude in the light of Scripture.

Forgive me if I spoiled your evening, but I don't feel that I've said anything that didn't need to be said. If I have seemed harsh to you I apologise, my intentions were honourable in that I wanted to address issues that you might find challenging, and I will pray that you will give consideration to some of the things I have spoken about.

I would add that it is wrong to say that neither of us will ever change our viewpoint, the Holy Spirit could convict anyone on this board at any time, and that includes you and me. Its satan's desire, of course, that we should always be divided by this music issue, but praise God He is able to overcome.

Your Brother In Christ,

Enda

 

"No music to it?" Only a beat and indistiguishable words? This is a serious overgeneralization, as a lot of the contemporary styles have strong melodies, and clear words. You and other CCM critics are taking extremes (such as acid) and trying to sweep away a whole genre with it. You also have not shown that all rock cannot "lift the spirit and soothe the soul", and that only classical or traditional can do those things, or even that if it is not doing those things, it is necesarily feeding "the flesh".
You made a lot of points about people reacting to correction, but you have to show that what you are saying is "correct" in order be able to "correct" people with it.

 

Thanks for the laugh, Dr. Bob. I wholeheartedly agree with this statement!

 

(Bro Enda)
The lyrics (which are spiritual in nature) should be heard CLEARLY above the music. This is of utmost importance in worship.

(Fish)
Well, what do you think about those singers who have that operatic voice with an extreme vibratto that makes everything hard to understand? I've heard plenty of people sing hymns with voices like that, and if I hadn't already known the words, I would have never gotten them from their singing.

(Bro Enda)
Can you show me any instance of music being used in worship by Christians in the New Testament?
I apply the regulative principle and believe we are commended to worship in spirit and in truth.

Aesthetic worship is not worshipping in spirit and in truth.

(Fish)
Could you explain what you mean by that? It sounds as if you are saying that we should not use music to worship since it wasn't used in the NT. I really don't think you are, but that's how its sounding to me.

 

It is interesting to note in history that after several performances of classical concerts in Europe audiences broke out in unruly riots. You are over generalizing and stereotyping rock music based upon your personal prejudices. It always amazed me that many Christians who were so vocal in their opposition to rock music were totally silent and often permissive of Country music when it was the "in" thing. Depite the fact that much country music champions alchohaulism, infidelity, promiscuity, and a loser lifestyle in general - really positive goals and models for our youth to strive for - huh? Rock music has succeeded because of the universal acceptence of its messages while country music faltered relatively due to its rejection (mostly cultural) on the international front. There is a lot of rock music that is not good for anyone, and there is a lot which I believe is harmless. I used to listen to depressing songs when I felt bad. Thats because after a while I eventually hit rock bottom and the only place to go was up! Music is like items in a candy store - there are many flavors for different individuals based upon their tastes. Rock music is really no longer a valid term anyway because music has become so diverse that its difficult to apply a all encompassing metaphor to any one particular style. Many overzealous Christins in their exaspirating attempts to quell the popularity of secular music among children in congregations have resorted to outright untruths in order to get their points across. I'm sure youve heard the stories about Ozzy Osbourne eating human feces onstage, and the one about him biting the head off of a live bat and spitting it onto a table in front of many prominent Los Angelos businessmen. Neither incident actually occured. Both are urban legends that have been purported by secular and christian sources alike who never verified them. The one about Ozzy eating human feces grew out of an earlier rumor started about Frank Zappa. Supposedly Zappa ate a plate of hot feces during an onstage performance. Zappa denied the incident many times in interviews as did members of his band. Urban legend researchers and people within the music industry tracked the rumor as it passed from Zappa to Alice cooper in the late 70's and evetually to Ozzy Osbourne in the 80's. All of whom deny it happening. The second one about the bat has some basis in real events but has been distorted and sensationalized. Here's what really happened:
During a prticular Black Sabbath concert an audience member tossed a live bat onstage. Well, Ozzy was really loaded and, thinking it was a toy, chomped the head off. When he realized that it was in fact a real bat he bolted offstage and vomittted. Later that night he recieved a tetanus shot at the emergency room at a local hospital. The second part is as follows:
Ozzy was indeed invited to a businessmen's meeting in L.A.. But when he showed up he was suffering from a whopping hangover. During the course of the meeting he got sick to his stomach and puked all over the table. Somehow the two incidents got combined and wala!
I've heard the original legends recounted by numerous pastors and speakers in servies designed to warn youth about the dangers of rock music as well as detailed as fact by Bob Larson in his (in)famous book - "The Truth About Rock" (or more aptly titled "101 Urban Legends about popular recording artists and performers sure to sicken an audience into revulsion.") I believe there are plenty of reasons to not hold people like Ozzy Ozbourne up as role models (he's burned his brain out on drugs and is basically a walking zombie) without resorting to lies by promoting propaganda designed to make our audience dislike him. What would Jesus do?
Socrates was accused of perveting the minds of the children in ancient Greece as were Jazz musicians of the early 20th century by our grandparents but I seriously doubt Christians today would object to their progeny reading a little Plato or relaxing to the Tunes of Miles Davis. You're trying to promote your own likes/dislikes by backing it up with a contrived theological base that in all honesty doesn't really exist.

 

Ironically, the teaching that only classical is good is rooted in Plato's "gold standard", and most of these people do lump Jazz in with rock as bad.

 

Some music makes me very angry. Like Marilyn Manson stealing our kids only because he has a great band and that draws them into the message.

Music is a spiritual thing and most songs are "religious" depending on your god.

But the purpose of music in any particular song is building an atmosphere for the listener to receive the message of the lyrics.

Notes by themselves have only the power to invoke the imagination of the listener. What the listener does with his/her imagination is up to them.

The lyrics convey the spirit behind the songwriter. This is really the only communication possible in a song...the singer and the words.

All music has a purpose but not all songs have the same purpose. For instance, there are songs designed to make you feel excited so you'll stay in a store and buy something. Then there are songs designed to make you feel safe as you get into the elevator.

MUSIC used in a worship service is a reflection of the cultural background of that particular church. I can't stand hymns but I would never speak against someone who loves them. That would be a critical spirit...not very gracious at all.

To me, hymns are yesterday's manna. They were GREAT for their time and we are grateful for their being written but I'm ready for something fresh....something that can be identified as "our" contribution to christian culture.

Those songs that Bro Enya doesn't like weren't meant for him. It's that simple.

Is he implying that we are somehow less christian because we might like a band as talented as POD?

This divisive banter about one musical style (which is only cultural preference) being holier than another is just whack.

If you really believe that is true then we should all be singing the Psalms to jewish melodies in hebrew as the first church did.

Which, by the way, is what I do...

 

Yod... I'd love to hear some of your stuff. Have you recorded any? I believe Paul Wilbur and a couple of others are the only guys I've heard doing it. I would love to see/hear the worship you lead. I think it would be very cool and interesting.

 

I am saying one must first be predisposed to feeling whatever emotion a given piece of music communicates. </font>[/QUOTE]Isn't fallen man predisposed (made inclined to something in advance) to all manner of sinful emotion?? Of course we are, therefore certain types of music can and will induce sinful emotions in us, unless of course, you believe you've reached a place of sinless perfection.

Sure. Troubled kids from broken homes aren't troubled kids from broken homes because they listen to Eminem or slayer. They listen to Eminem or Slayer because they are troubled kids from broken homes. They are already angry and disaffected. The music doesn't make them angry. It only magnifies an emotion they want magnified.[/QUOTE]

So music is a tool which can be used by the devil to heighten sinful emotions which already exist within us, due to our sinful nature. I think I can agree.

Proof? Research? Expert opinion?

I think that following your last post it is case closed. Sorry for taking so long to point that out to you. I have noted that, in spite of your boastful claims at the outset of this discussion, you didn't manage to come up with any evidence to back up your opinion that Christians are free to listen to all types of music because it is morally neutral.

Christians MUST take great care in what they listen to, I'm not saying you are sinning by listening to Bob Dylan, you can be the judge of that. I am saying that you should be aware of the effect that music can have on you and particularly on those around you.

I doubt if you only listen to music when other people are not around you. As Christians we must be aware of the effect that our actions can have on others, especially young children. We must consider not only what we are predisposed to, but also what others are predisposed to, and be careful that our actions are not leading others to sin.

As Scripture says, 'No man liveth unto himself' and whilst you may feel that the music you listen to does not cause YOU to sin, you must consider that by exposing someone else to it you may be causing them to sin.

 

OK...you finally said something I can agree with. Yay!

Just like any thing we do, it should glorify God. I promise to never put on any christian rock if you are within hearing range!