Domino Effect not just in the Power Grid

No, duh Sherlock

 

Just speaking for myself here---I am not anti- new songs or ccm,or what some call praise and worship . For one thing,I do not understand when people use the term praise and worship for a certain style of music...isn't all music we have been singing for hundreds of years praising and worshipping God? That terminology baffles me....the bible tells us to praise God and worship Him with our lives(Roman 12:1-2) and that God inhabnits the praise of His people...so,what is new and different about the newer songs...are you saying that THEY are more about praising and worshipping because there is more genuine feeling in them...hymns are not,but only the newer songs labelled *praise and worship* are??? This makes no sense! I have been prasing and worshipping God for many years without Shine Jesus Shine...gimme a break!

The next thing I must clarify....as I have said many times before...I am not in opposition to choruses,new songs and such as long as they are biblical God honoring and for God and not man. We sang three songs this morning in corporate worship that I consider newer songs and they were good,edifying,and in correct tone with our message. But,there were done in a reverent way,with the focus on God,not a praise band with a new style to make people feel more comfortable. It was done for God,in the most excellent way we could for God's glory,not for Joe,who was visiting that day.

Please do not misunderstand,I desire for Joe to come to know Christ,and I believe as we share Christ with him,he may...but we do not make church for Joe...we make it as God honoring as possible,with God's word the standard,not what Joe wants. Get it? Then people see that church is for believers and we share Christ with them,so they then become believers. They change,the church doesn't.

Am I against anyone who likes contempo stuff,no...can and should you listen to it in your home care,etc? Yes,that's fine,as long as you are discerning about lyrics and such...but,corporate worship is different....I say for corporate worship,stick with what is the most biblical in message,style(reverent to a Holy God),and challenging to the those singing and listening...it should encourage us to be more Godly...it should be heart felt and genuine.

I would say if a church sees the need to change to a new style,maybe it is the hearts that need a change,not the music. Hearts are harder to deal with...anybody can make church more appealling,it doesn't take a genuis. God does not call the church to be more appealing,but more pure,more like Christ than ever before.

Sorry for the length.

It expresses my thought and heart on this topic.

Thanks for reading!
Molly

 

Joshua said:

I suppose that would do for starters but you didn't mention burning it.

All Christians come out from the ungodly music industry where so many have become unequally yoked together with unbelievers.

This of course leaves you and other musicians/lyricists wondering what to do with your talents.

I don't see that as a problem, these talents may not have been given for financial profit. (Would you agree?) Our talents and gifts should be used first and foremost for the glory of God and secondly for the edification of our brothers and sisters within our local congregations.

I have no doubt there are many talented musicians and lyricists among God's people, and Joshua you may well be one of them, I don't know. I hope you understand that I have no objection to you writing Christian lyrics, in fact I would encourage it. The church always needs peolple like yourself to bring us new hymns which can be used in worship for the glory of God and the edification of the saints.

Personally I just don't think that this is what drives the average CCM artist, I'm not reading your heart here Joshua, I accept that some artists may have the right and proper motives but I genuinely feel that the CCM industry by and large is a profit-driven organisation and no Christian should be entangled in it. In spite of honest and genuine individuals like yourself I have yet to be convinced that music can be produced for worship/entertainment and profit all at once.

Do you see where I am coming from?

I believe that as a Christian musician you should take your work to your brothers and sisters within your local Church, if you have a recognisable gift that could be used for God's glory and the edification of the saints on a wider scale then I think it beholds them to support you in the distribution of your hymns to other churches. Of course these other churches will have the right to decide for themselves if your work has any merit.

Can you see how a system as simple as this could work, you write a beautiful hymn, take it to your church who use it in worship and distribute the hymn to other churches. All the while, the emphasis is on God not on the artist, who through time, will of course become known and respected by his brothers and sisters in Christ. I would say that this kind of recognition and appreciation is what Christian artists should be aiming for, but as you would say yourself, that's just my opinion. Hope it doesn't upset you in any way, I'm just trying to promote a realistic solution to what seems a genuine problem.

 

Joshua, I would add that if a local church believed they had a talented hymn-writer within their membership I believe it would be proper for them to support that person financially. Just thought I'd mention that in case you thought I was advocating a life of poverty.

Just thinking about that, I would love as a Christian to be able to support someone who had a God-given gift which he was using purely for the Glory of God.

 

I agree with Enda...that our gifts be used to edify and build up our local church for God's glory...not for sordid gain or stardom.

Just thought I'd add my 2 cents.

Molly

 

Most of the "lower level" songwriters/musicians in CCM are doing just that, Bro. I know you don't believe it but you still haven't explained why.

And money?

There is none for artists who can't hang on for at least 3-5 years of making zip.

Yes...and they should be because it is a business. No business would be open if people didn't buy the "product" and there are plenty of people who want what they are selling

Somehow they have to get attention for their "product" just like a roofing company would. This, in my opinion, is the real problem. Money is only there for those who make it "big" so what is the reason so many are willing to be waifs in the meantime? Fame. Idolotry. Ego. Pride.
Envy.

We all want to be significant and there is nothing wrong with that but the hype it takes to sell a bunch of records makes "stars" out of people who should be humbling themselves instead. This is the rotten thing you smell. Every person fights this in their own life....

It's just more visible on the stage.

I think so....but do you understand that not all music falls into the same category? Some songs are made for worship, some are made for changing attitudes, some is evangelistic, etc...

Some of it is just entertainment done by christians. How many of us hold ourselves to the same standards we are demanding of these artists? Do you give the full gospel message every time you answer the phone at work? Do you sing hymns to everyone on your lunch break?

These people have at least dedicated themselves to using their ability to glorify the Lord. I can tell you that there is MUCH more money in the secular realm.

you would probably be surprised to find out that this is exactly where most new talent comes from. Nowadays the cost of recording has come way down with new technology so the grassroots level artists are playing on a more level field.

A high percentage of new bands are being signed because they already have the finished product in the form of a CD that they produced themselves and is already selling well. The labels look for this kind of self contained group now

I hear you there. This IS a tough one because music is a passion with almost everyone so the public is prone to passionately support those whom they like. Is that much different than Adrian Rogers filling up Bellvue Baptist Church because people like and respect him?

Your passion for purity of the faith is evident...and honorable. I could not agree with you more on that last statement. There is no reason why that should upset anyone.


Yet still I sincerely believe this is exactly what most of the people in CCM are aiming for...and yet agree with you that ALL of them lose focus along the way. That is part of our daily walk though...trying to maintain focus when everything around is pulling us away. It takes a strong faith to survive in all high profile positions whether it's an artist or a pastor or a radio DJ or whatever....

Feel free to pray for revival. The Lord has already begun to shake the foundations. hallelujah!

 

The provisions to worship with dancing and instruments (and incense and animals, etc.) are the concessions.

BTW, there was no dancing in the synagogues or the Temple for that matter. That was something for national celebrations, but I included that because of the common misconception.

 

Replying to Scott's post:

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000592;p=7#000081

But there you have it. Repeated over and over and over and over and over again in a call and response. Calling it "absurd" does not take away the fact that this phrase is repeated continually.
</font>[/QUOTE]It isn't the same. If the Psalm was simply:

His mercy endures forever
His mercy endures forever
His mercy endures forever
His mercy endures forever
His mercy endures forever
His mercy endures forever..
(You get the picture...)

Then you might get to say what you are saying about it. But that's enough about the Psalm. You're wrong about how it can be used and the kind of repition endorsed.

Now, I am not going to go round and round with you about every jot and tittle of Jewish worship.

The point I was making was that you cannot interpret everything in the Psalms as applying literally to Christian worship. The Early Church did not use instruments (a point you contested and later had to concede) and neither did the Jews in the synagogues. This shows that even under the Law the Jews understood that the Psalms were not commandments and instructions for the form of worship.

That brings us back to my main point:

CCM first caught on in Pentecostal/Charismatic circles because it is easier to evoke ecstatic responses with repetitious, heavily rhythmic music than it is with handclapping, hallelujah's, glory's to God, and so on repeated over and over in a mantra-like fashion.

The tithe is irrelevant, but I'll answer it anyway. If anyone is giving only 10%, then he does not understand the New Testament principle of giving. But that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax.

 

Don't think I conceded the music part. In fact, the post that you brought up that was archived was quite interesting at the lack of evidence that is there concerning the absence of music.

CCM actually, to be honest, began as soon as Luther began translating hymns into the vernacular language of the people. He made music "contemporary." Contemporary music has continued through the ages as new types of music have been incorporated in worship, from the four part chorales of Bach to the emerging of folk hymns to Southern Gospel to what the praise and worship music that we currently have. In fact, I'd be interested to see you show me, oh, let's say 5 praise and worship songs that have the same phrase over and over and over again with no breaks, as you posted earlier in the post.

 

There's another one of those red herrings. Are you sure you aren't a fish monger of some kind?

When I say CCM, I am using it to describe the styles it is generally used to describe; i.e. pop or rock. I have said in the past that CCM is a misnomer—a "red herring" if you will—created in an attempt to take the focus off the rock'n'roll aspects and put it on the time that something was composed.

The debate is not about the time that something was composed, but about its style.

How about 5 with the heavy backbeat? Let's look at my disputed statement in full AGAIN:

It is easier to evoke ecstatic responses with repetitious, heavily rhythmic music than it is with handclapping, hallelujah's, glory's to God, and so on repeated over and over in a mantra-like fashion.

Again (consistency is a fault of mine) the focus is on the style.

In the old days before the jazzy music took hold, a typical Pentecostal service would eventually end up with folks all over doing their own thing trying to drum-up their ecstasies.

Glory to God
Glory to God
Glory to God
Glory to God
Glory to God...

Halle-LU-jah!
Halle-LU-jah!
Halle-LU-jah!
Halle-LU-jah!
Halle-LU-jah!...

And hear and there some hand-clapping to substitute a kind of drum rhythm.

Before long the tongues, the holy rolling, the dancing would start, and all done in a very real altered state of consciousness which these poor souls mistook for the "spirit falling."

But that rhythmic drumming can facilitate altered states is well established by the fact that every single shamanisitc ritual in the world regardless of the culture utilizes it in their rituals.

Lack of evidence? My dear doctor-hopeful, don't say that too loudly around the music professors. And whether you concede now or not, you will be forced to concede if you research this at all. Facts are stubborn things.

 

How about this "Red Herring"? (If the picture doesn't come up)
Yeah, Freddy, he always did it!

Once again, from my CCM page:
...And the most common beats used in rock aren't even exacly like the beats of voodoo ritual. There is a lot of broad categorization in these teachings as we shall see more of, with music being labeled "rock", "jazzy", "voodoo" or "jungle" purely because of the land it came from, rather than them really being the same forms. It was certain elements of certain songs that artists may have taken directly from voodoo or Eastern religion, but that doesn't make the backbeat itself, nor most of the "syncopation" rock is criticized for particularly of voodoo origin. But this is the basis of these claims that none of this music is any good.

Cloud has been making a great emphasis on
warning us of the "jazzy" music coming from the "charismatics" and accompaniment tapes, but what is
really wrong with this? To him, it seems to be bad for no other reason than because he tags it with the
"jazz" label. (Most of it doesn't really even sound like "jazz" at all, but once again, it's the beat and certain amount of syncopation or strong harmonies that automatically lumps it in as "jazz" or "rock") Even if a worship song makes me tap my hand, this is not bad, and does not necessarily "distract" (I am also similarly influenced by some traditional songs, such as "To God be the Glory").
-------------------------
While it is certainly true that certain radically charismatic churches, the movements of the women did resemble some ritual, still you cannot lump all of CCM or even all charismatics into this category, just to demonize all things modern, because they are not all like this. That is an unfair generalization, and is itself a "Red Herring". So, as he says, "What a dipola, Jones!"

 

Hey, Eric. As always, thanks for the timely response. You're quite wise, you know!

As for Aaron, head over to your local Baptist University and ask the resident music history professor about music in the early church and he'll disagree with you.

 

I don't need too. What will he know about it that Donald J. Grout hasn't said? And he will go to Grout because Grout wrote the textbook he used to study music history.

 

One thing to keep in mind, though, is that I am not generalizing about anything. Not all CCM services look like the Pentecostal service I described. Heavenly days! Not all the Pentecostal services look like that. Some use rattlesnakes and strycknine.

There are different degrees and levels in every experience.

Now, the statement you made, "...the most common beats used in rock aren't even exacly like the beats of voodoo ritual," presupposes that you have a good knowledge of the beats used in a voodoo ritual. I know from my reading that there are many different rhythms used by the drummer to control the one who is possessed by the "loa" (a demon really). To get a certain response he uses a certain rhythm. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to the kinds of rhythms used, the corresponding results, and how they differ from the most common rock beats. This is a level of knowledge necessary to make the statement you made, and a level of knowledge I don't think you have.

So, speaking of broad categorizations, you take the cake with that one. Or...

...is it the one that says the Early Church Fathers were anti-semetic, Plato-poisoned and sexually frustrated?

I don't know. I think it's a toss up!

Gimme the beat, boys
To free my soul,
I wanna get lost
In your rock'n'roll

and drift away.

Describes an altered state. It also describes what many CCM and "Praise and Worship" people mistake for "the spirit falling." It's easy with that kind of music. It's sensual, not spiritual.

 

Guys, do you think we should tell Aaron that this isn't a CCM song?

 

Cute,Mike!

Molly

 

It doesn't matter, because it isn't about the words or who wrote it; it's about the style.

 

It doesn't matter, because it isn't about the words or who wrote it; it's about the style. </font>[/QUOTE]It does matter because you're judging CCM based on the lyrics of a song that (a) isn't a CCM song and (b) aren't about what you're claiming they're about.

Those of us who have had to put up with your ignorance about music and all of these whacko booklets and sites about music you seem to come up with for a while now know that these are common tactics of yours.

It reminds me of the time you tried to convince us that there was this "evil" kind of music called "razzmatazz" that no one had ever heard of.

 

It perfectly describes the feelings elicited by that style.

And what we've come to expect from you is this deliberate misrepresentation of facts. Some people call that lying. Razzmatazz was a popular form of Jazz. If you do a Google search for the term you will get more than 30,000 results.

No one ever heard of it?

And neither was I, as you, again, falsely asserted, trying to convince anyone of its evil. I listed it as a popular form of music in the 20's and challenged folks to present the Christian music from the same era in that style.*

*http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=58;t=003185

 

Again, you're attempting to condemn CCM based on a non CCM song, which isn't even about what you're telling us it's about.

That you have to go back and find a thirty year old non-CCM song and misrepresent it's meaning in order to condemn CCM says more than any defense I can make.

I've misrepresented nothing. All I did was point out that you have taken a thirty year old non-CCM song to condemn CCM, rather than an actual CCM song and you have intentionally misrepresented it's meaning in order to butress your goofy arguments.

And then there are most of us who know what we're talking about.

Yes, I challenge anyone to do a Google search. They'll come up with the same thing I came up with when I did a Google search: nada.

In addition, I went to allmusicguide.com, which is generally recognized to be a very comprehensive look at popular musics.

A search for "razzmatazz" returned nothing. Here is a list of all of the jazz categories:

Jazz Blues
Jazz-Funk
Jazz-Pop
Jazz-Rap
Jazz-Rock
Acid Jazz
Free Jazz
Soul-Jazz
Trad Jazz
Latin Jazz
Chamber Jazz
Electro-Jazz
Hot Jazz Jazz
Jazz-House
Folk-Jazz
Mini Jazz
Crossover Jazz
Cuban Jazz
Vocal Jazz
Afro-Cuban Jazz
Avant-Garde Jazz
New Orleans Jazz
Smooth Jazz
African Jazz
Classic Jazz
Township Jazz
Brazilian Jazz
Continental Jazz
Mainstream Jazz
Orchestral Jazz
Progressive Jazz
West Coast Jazz


Interesting that such a comprehensive site would go into such detail about such arcane forms of jazz and yet leave out any mention of such a popular form of jazz as "razzmatazz".

There is no such thing.

Maybe they have and they're just keeping it a secret.

Not true. The whole point of the thread (as with all of your redundant "CCM is evil" threads) was that it was bad.

And you were never able to demonstrate that it ever exsisted.

How could we when no such music exsisted?

Yes, I would encourage anyone who's interested to go to this thread to see for themselves.