Classic Hymns VS CCM music in church

I looked in our Pentecostal Hymnal and ***IT*** had both Baptist **and** Methodist Hymns in it!

Gasp...

Apoplexy!....

rbell, you are a gem!

 

Ok, WOW we have really drifted off of the subject here. Now instead of talking about the topic at hand we have resorted to bashing other people who post on this thread. Everyone has the right to post their opinion on this (because that's basically all any thread is) so let's not bash people about their opinion. I happen to agree with dcorbett. I also am an Independent Fundamental KJV only baptist, and I don't apologize for that at all. Yes, I'll sing hymns that were written by people from other denominations and if I find a doctrinal error I will change it. (Check out my thread on lyrics that aren't doctrinal). Oh and by the way baptists were never protestants. We come from the anabaptists, who in turn came from Christ and his disciples (but that is a completely different thread altogether). Let's try to get back to the subject at hand. I believe it was "What should be used in church services 'Old time hymns' or 'CCM'.

 

Music,

I've looked back a couple of pages...I see no bashing going on. My posts...

Affirmed dcorbett, a sister in Christ who sees things from a much more traditional stance than I, for her church's convictions and her willingness to call preference a preference. I also expressed congratulations about her son's salvation.

I did make a "shofar" joke and joke about the Methodists Wesley, et al, and their hymns. Is that bashing?

I did see where some (including me) asserted that a particular view did not have direct biblical support. That ain't "bashing," that is pointing out what we see as a flaw in another's assertions.

You will find that I am one (most of the time , but striving for perfection) who refrains from personal attacks. I just want to keep that in the forefront and not be accused of "bashing" anyone.

What should be used in church services? In our church...Any music--old ("The Old Rugged Cross"), ancient ("Of the Father's Love Begotten"), and modern ("My Savior, My God")--that glorifies God. We use it all, and God is blessing us richly.

In your church...well, that's up to your leadership there.

 

Oh .. and since it won't be long until Father's Day, where we will all be obliged to sing, "Faith of Our Fathers", let's be aware that this one comes out of the Oxford Movement and its efforts to return the Church of England to a Roman Catholic allegiance. One of the verses conspicuously absent from our hymnals says, "Faith of our Fathers, Mary's prayer shall turn the nation unto Thee ...". Hmm, I don't think it's about the kind of fathers we celebrate in June.

 

WOW!!! I wonder how many of these KJVO types sing that song. I know it's in the hymnals. I thought it was like the anthem of the separatist American IFB movement.
Are BJU, Chick, Watkins, and others who make big deals of the origins of rock music and how changing the words is no good aware of this change?

 

as was already said in here, if it is scriptural, we sing it without any problem. We change phrases in songs if they are not scriptural.

It is the the music that does not edify the Lord that we are against in church.

KJVO Debbie

 

But it can be argued that simply changing words is not enough. That is the argument used against modern styles, but even if the style you may approve of, still, there is the association, and spirit behind the song, if one is consistent.

 

Probably would not matter as the problem they point out in the context of "Rock & Roll" is the immoral music, not the words.

Good music with bad words can have the words changed and then, depending on the association of the music, be used profitably.

Bad music with good words would need new music for the good words to be most profitable.

Bad music with bad words is 90% of CCM. No, I realise most CCM has acceptable words and it is mostly the music I object to.

In the context of Faith of Our Fathers both music and words are fine, with the exception of that third stanza...

Also, the more I look into this whole issue, the more I pray and consider the info, the harder the issue seems.

While on the one hand I cannot accept just any and all musical styles I also believe you can go too far the other way and exclude styles that are fine.

Where do you draw the line?

Perhaps its because most churches I have seen that "loosend" up their music standards soon departed from any stand on music at all, any stand on Bible versions were abandoned, they lost many dress standards, the teaching weakened and weakened, it ends up looking less and less about God and more and more about individuals.

I realise my experiance does not determine truth or that all churches with music that differs to mine go this way. But it just seems the vast majority do.

Not attacking, just stating what I have seen and the dilemma I find myself in.

 

Ain't that the truth!

I can't accept everything that comes down the pike from a 'Christian' label either.

You have to walk in the Spirit and discern/test the spirits in a service.

Not easy...

But, a prideful Music Minister can ruin the best of Songs by the spirit he's caching within him.

It's unfortunate that that happens...

The standard should be Spiritually based. And, if you've been 'Law' based then it's hard to learn how to change to the spirit because you keep falling back into the same trap.

Some churches persevere and have meaningful dialogs on music song by song...

Other give up in disgust. (Bummer)

Nor, does my 'good' experiences with CCM mean that I have all the answers either...

And, even as a CCM proponent there is a lot of 'looseness' that cries out for the need of a 2 Chronicles 7:14 revolution!

It's a daily walk... Never easy...

SMM

 

That's a grave double standard, because the entire basis of labeling the music in question "immoral" in the first place is associations: rock stars used that beat for immorality, rebellion, drugs, etc, and they got it from Africans who used it for voodoo. Now, most of us today listening to it would not know or be thinking of this, except for CCM critics dredging this stuff up to condemn it by guilt by association. So if that's the case, then a song made by Catholics that originally praised Mary should be rejected by these same fundamentalists (being themselves the hardest on Catholicism) regardless of whether the verse is removed. Its the association of who it was made by and what it was used for that makes it bad. If those same people are so against modern evangelical leaders for so much as "associating" with Catholics, then they should be consistent and not use any Catholic songs. That is but one example of the selective nature of the Traditional-Only teaching, yet it is used to wage such a heated war on others.

Perhaps they loosened up because of this very problem we are addressing. The old-liners were on one hand way too strict, but then full of such double standards and loopholes to top it off. This causes confusion; so just throw off the restrictions and try anything.

 

The entire basis is not association but sound. And it is not just CCM critics but secular studies and groups that have criticised the debasing and negative effects of some music.

Sometimes intentions are not good enough. If I, with good intentions, give some one an overdose of aspirin with the intention of making them better is the result different from someone giving an overdose with the intention of killing them?

Sometimes no matter what the intentions the results will be negative because the product itself is intrinsically wrong.

Anyway, we've been down this road already. There is a fork and we go different ways.

 

It started with association, then this whole "sound" issue with the "secular studies" was thrown in to try to give it some empirical basis. But even that is inconclusive, and based largely on tabloid style junk science that is not universally accepted by everyone, and even then, we often selectively draw snippets from these things and ignore many factors, and even bend facts (like random drum beats affecting mice being called a "rock" beat).

Still, association is one of the primary crtieria, and if consistent, you would reject Catholics songs as well. But instead, "our classical culture versus that jungle culture" is the issue being unconditionally made of this.

 

Is that what you call research you personally disagree with?

 

No, but this has been discussed elewhere; and I even briefly explained how factors are omitted from it. It is not unversally agreed on by science or musicology, and is only a sensationalized claim by some researchers, just like many others you hear of flashed in the news. (such as the latest diet theories, many of which contradict each other).

You can see my whole treatise of it here:
http://members.aol.com/etb700/ccm.html#science

 

There is a *LOT* of junk science out there...

And, I can probably create a study that shows that Hymns are bad because they put people to sleep...

Because of that, BBN should have it's FCC license revoked because it plays hymns and people fall asleep while driving...

I mean both sides can get carried away with 'proof-texting' their position...

With me, Music is a Spiritual Issue...

Not a style issue...

True enough that some styles lend themselves more redily to unSpiritual behavior than others...

But, honestly, as I've gotten older I can't keep up with a Rock and Roll beat when with my wife and I find the tempo of Hymns much more conducive and, even Spiritual, for in marriage the bed is undefiled...

(Sorry couldn't resist. But, I felt the point needed to be made. )

For me it's not style its the intent of the Heart in the useage of the style that counts...

I like being passionate in my Worship...

IMHO, Quiet Hymns are not conducive to expressing Passion for God like *some* Praise and Worship Music is...

But, for a person who is not as Passionate in Worship Style as I, the Music I find most conducive would be 'unsettling'...

So, what do we do?

Both groups live and show a love for God and a Passion for His Word and hold to a common set of reasonable doctrines...

Do we fight and separate the body of christ or do we Rejoice that there are others of like precious faith who love Jesus as much as we do?

If nothing we can call each other 'Peculiar'...

SMM

Titus 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.


1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

 

If I wasn't one of the worst offenders, I'd probably ask you all why you're still discussing this, but I know that I'll be back in the next "rock is bad" thread.

Now Playing: EmmyLou Harris and Mark Knopfler - "All the Roadrunning"

 

Huh?

What I miss? What I miss?

You're an offender?

How much time did you get?

SMM

 

Probably would not matter as the problem they point out in the context of "Rock & Roll" is the immoral music, not the words.
</font>[/QUOTE]Hey, I happen to like rock & roll.

Rock of Ages cleft for me.
and
When the Roll is Called up Yonder I'll be there.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

DHK Amen!

I've heard other variations, too...

Jesus is my Rock and I am on the Roll...

SMM

 

I used to be proud and happy to invite people to my church.No more.Yesterday if you closed your eyes and listen to the music you would have thought you were in a high class nightclub.I'm and old person and don't have much time left I can't keep running from church to church.You know we did not sing one hymn together.We just listen to that worldly music and some of it was good.What happened to our standers? we have lowered them to catch the crowd and pay for big churches.The way things are going next month they will tell us to Bring y.o.b. and lets get it on.