Featured Confusing worship and evangelism

BTW, Brother Luke, I agree with your last two posts. We should be always seeking His face and doing what He wants us to do.

 

Agreed....

peace and prayers

Jeff

 

First of all, I'm not convicned that the passages you have given were meant primarily as models for corporate, New Testament Worship...certainly none of them fit that description. The Closest we have to such a thing tells us that the activities were: Teaching, Fellowship, Breaking of Bread, & Prayer. Not really even any instructions in Acts, or the Epistles about a service dedicated to Worship of God alone to the exclusion of fellowship, Evangelism, teaching, etc.

Second, There are other scriptures that describe things done in worship that would seem to be at odds with your definition of an "Atmosphere" of reverence...

149:1 Praise the Lord! Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise in the assembly of the godly! 2 Let Israel be glad in his Maker; let the children of Zion rejoice in their King! 3 Let them praise his name with dancing, making melody to him with tambourine and lyre!

Ps. 150: 4 Praise him with tambourine and dance; praise him with strings and pipe! 5 Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals!

I'm convinced that your definition of the proper "Atmosphere" for a God-honoring, human, New Testament Worship Service is too narrow, narrower than the descriptions found in scripture. Creating an "atmosphere" is not the primary goal. Clearly Communicating the Gospel Narrative is. (not just for Evangelism, but because it is the message that creates worship, discipleship, fellowship, edification, & also Evangelism.)

I suppose that I see different reasons for using guitars and other instruments in worship...I'm convinced that the musical style in a corporate worship service should be one that is accessible and relatable to the most amount of people in the service...It doesn't have to be everyone's favorite...but it needs to be accessible...For most people in America, that includes hymns and other songs with easy-to-sing tunes. For the majority in my church, it does not include very many K-Love songs...since they are primarily written for solo performance, not congregational use.

The point is, if my church did Igor Stravinky's Symphony of psalms...It would certainly be majestic and transcendent...but I don't think that's the primary goal...It would also be completely irrelevant to a large number of people, and it would not really help them draw closer to God, or confront them with his greatness...it would simply confuse them.

The goal for me is to connect the best words with the most singable tunes in a musical style that will be familiar enough to not be distracting...joyful enough, or somber enough, or majestic enough (depending on the song) to not be dull and lifeless.

The goal of singing "A Mighty Fortress" with a slightly different accompaniment is to give a younger generation the opportunity to sing a great song in a way that makes musical sense to them.

 

Actually, SBC "Disaster Relief" is on-site as well, just to inform all the readers/posters on this thread.

Check out this page: http://www.namb.net/

 

I could not agree more whole-heartedly and completely and un-reservedly. It is a wonderful happenstance if via our worship or music God chooses to reach the heart of a sinner and "evangelization" occurs....but our audience is, and always will be an audience of ONE. If no "Evangelization" does occur via our "Worship Service" so be it. We worship AND we evangelize, I don't think we "worship/evangelize". This has been bothering me for ages. Personally, this is the very premise from which I wholly reject the notion of having a "traditional" worship service (for the blue-hairs) and a "contemporary" worship service (for us young hipsters)...If you have BOTH...then you have "worshipped" in neither one IMO. "Worship" is for God and God ALONE....Evangelization occurs via the preaching of the gospel, not the singing of songs or the "Worship" portion of a service.
In some ways...it can often be positive for many to visit Liturgical denominations sometimes.....Occasionally, it can be truly beneficial to see the positive difference in the attitude towards worship in them.

 

Well, the "company that keep" is a group of theologically diverse people who are leading wonderful churches. Of the reformed churches I know of none of them subscribe to this Regulatory Principle. When I've asked the leaders have said they don't buy the arguments.

You can have profoundly biblical, robustly theological, sound Christians who utilize progressive worship music. How do I know, because we see it every week. The argument that because some churches appear (because mostly we don't know) to lack this that we must, then, move back to the RPW is not sound. Contextualized music isn't the reason there is poor theology and poor Christian living. In fact several churches in our area that use highly liturgical forms have some of the most liberal theology around.

Maybe how we use music in our services isn't the issue.

 

Growth is possible in nearly ever situation where the Gospel is preached, people are loved, and Christ is honored. I firmly believe that growth is a sign of health for most churches. There are plenty of churches in non-churched areas and countries that see growth with the right kind of leadership.

I simply don't see consistent, sustainable growth trends in the churches who adopt this Regulatory Worship. There are some examples, for sure, which exist of churches that do grow. However, I'd be hard pressed to see this as a general rule across the board. In fact church growth and church planting experts will tell you (I know because I've asked) progressive worship music is the best way to start or revitalize a congregation.

I've got the data and its not the case. Go check out some stuff from the Great Commission Network, Leadership Network, and even Lifeway Research and you'll see this isn't the case. In fact, of all the church starts that I know of all of them are using progressive worship music for their services. None of them are using this Regulative Principle business.

I'd go even further and say that if we polled the entirety of evangelical new church starts in the past 5 years the overwhelming (probably about 90%+) majority use a kind of progressive worship music format.

 

I know this isn't directed at me but I would like to add this:

Seeing the trends in the earliest churches, there simply isn't a biblical format for any given service. There are examples of things we can draw on to build services but these two you've given are not good examples.

Particularly as we look at the style of the earliest Christian communities, their services looked completely different than ours. Even into the medieval period, there is little similarity. So we cannot affix a biblical mandate to worship format. It isn't appropriate and there are too many counter-examples.