MMF - Contemporary/band vs hymns/piano in worship service.

There is no such thing as "devil's music", there can be spiritually unhealthy lyrics or even undoctrinal lyrics but not devil's music....no music has ever nor does it now belong to Satan, that is giving the enemy far more credit than he deserves.

karen

 

Children born into Christian families do not automatically become Christians. They may hear songs like Amazing Grace from the cradle, but that doesn't make it a meaningful song to them unless their hearts have been changed by the grace of God. They like any others, have the flesh to deal with, are sinners in need of a Saviour, and have to make a personal decision for Christ themselves.

This coming Sunday many will no doubt sing the song "I serve a risen Saviour, He's in the world today..." To many twenty-year old Christians that song is still a new song in their hearts. It comes from their heart. They mean what they sing. Many others that will sing that song, (some of them will have known that song for twenty years also), but to them it will be an old song. The same old song, sung in the same old way, for their life has not been changed. They can't sing it from their heart because their heart has not been changed. They would rather sing the songs of the world that appeal to the flesh.
DHK

 

Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. (Ez.28:12,13)

Who is the Lord describing here, that was the workmanship of tabrets and of pipes (the workmanship of your tambourines and of your flutes in you [a literal translation]). In heaven Satan was the chief musician. He was cast down to earth and became the god of this world. Does he know a little about music. You bet he does! The devil has HIS crowd, HIS music, HIS world. Are you a part of it?
DHK

 

< Children born into Christian families do not automatically become Christians. >

Man, you really shattered my illusion with that one!

< They may hear songs like Amazing Grace from the cradle, but that doesn't make it a meaningful song to them unless their hearts have been changed by the grace of God. >

Then it is the person who has changed, not the music. This conflicts with your claim there must be a 'new' song.

< "I serve a risen Saviour, He's in the world today..." .... Many others that will sing that song, {some of them will have known that song for twenty years also}, but to them it will be an old song. The same old song, sung in the same old way, for their life has not been changed. >

And what does this say about the value of singing the 'old' songs in the 'old' way? Again, if there is a change, it is in the person, not the song and music.

< They would rather sing the songs of the world that appeal to the flesh. >

I gather this means that if a song is "appealing," it makes you feel good, then throw it out. People say that often about Amazing Grace and I Serve a Risen Saviour, and others. Many say they are "comforted" by these songs, which means they appeal to the flesh.

< In heaven Satan was the chief musician. He was cast down to earth and became the god of this world. Does he know a little about music. You bet he does! >

There may be much to debate about these statements of yours here, but first, show your scriptural reference for Satan being the "chief musician" and knowing about music.

Do you ignore Psalm 150, or do you praise with the timbrel and dance?

 

PSALM 150

Psalm 150 summons us to praise God with tambourines, dance, stringed instruments, organ (or pipe), trumpet, cymbals and harp. But once again we are immediately made aware that the psalmist has in mind not just the sanctuary (ie - the Temple worship) but also the national celebrations associated with the historic deliverances and victories, for he says - Praise him for his mighty acts (v2).

We remember that the tambourines and the dancing were not allowed in the Temple, but were always associated with national festivals and other times of special social rejoicing.

This psalm undoubtedly makes a figurative use of all these instruments, because the psalmist even calls upon the angels and the saints in glory to worship God with them, and they would obviously not literally use the poor instruments of this world. The psalmist calls to the occupants of Heaven when he says - Praise him in the firmament of his power, which is the infinite expanse where angels fly at God's command, and where the ransomed live and reign in glory.

Illustrating feeling
What, then, do these 'figurative' instruments signify? They are used to describe the character of our praise. We let each 'instrument' teach us something about the mood and vigour which should characterise true, worthy, heartfelt worship.

The great Puritan preacher, David Dickson, observed that the plurality and variety of these instruments were fit to represent divers conditions of the spiritual man, and to teach what stirring up there should be of the affections and powers of our soul to God's worship; what melody each should make to show the excellency of God's praise, which no instrument, nor any expression of the body, could adequately set forth.'

Andrew Bonar wrote, 'In this psalm's enumeration of musical instruments, there is a reference to the variety which exists among men in the mode of expressing joy and exciting feeling.'

The trumpet sounds the note of victory, and our praise should resound with triumph and exaltation. The psaltery and the harp give the sweet tones of feelingful gratitude and love.

The tambourine and dance speak of the effervescent energy, effort and enthusiasm of children and young people engaged in a favourite skilled activity.

Organs or pipes were instruments of pleasure rather than worship, and remind us that true praise should be the highest enjoyment of believers, not merely a duty.

The loud and resounding cymbals are an allusion to the volume, strength and power of worthy praise.

Psalm 150 only makes sense as a richly figurative psalm, which uses the passion and tone-colours of various instruments to highlight the feelings and moods of true worship.

No licence here
We conclude, therefore, that this glorious psalm was never intended to be reduced to a catalogue of instruments which could literally be used, and to give a licence to dance for the Lord! To interpret it in this way only makes the psalm contradict the regulations about instruments given elsewhere in the Old Testament.

The psalmist seeks to deepen our concept of feelingful praise, not to endorse instruments for the Temple which were previously banned, and to do this he refers to them in a figurative, poetic way.

The Old Testament in no way endorses or encourages the use of modern-idiom music in worship and witness as any careful study of the musical passages rapidly reveals. Restraint and regulations were even then the order of the day, for the 'helps' were not allowed to spoil the essential spiritual worship of God's people.

The use of instruments only broadened out where the national celebrations or cultural life of the nation were involved, but for direct spiritual activity, wise limitations were applied so that the spiritual things were pre-eminent.

These articles remain
© Copyright Dr Peter Masters 1983
The Metropolitan Tabernacle, England, UK

 

--Except for the medieval Europeans and early Americans. That is our "new song", right?

But there are other percussion instruments mentioned. But when this is pointed out in Psalms 150, then you appeal to Masters' allegory again. Just admit that this limited "acceptable" style (traditional only) argument is mistaken.

 

The "new song" is not tied to any musical style. It is a metaphor that the Bible uses for a new attitude, a new life, if you will. That new life is created by our regeneration in Christ and is matured as we mature in faith. I've found that the song does change as I grow in Christ, it becomes more joyful.

Steve

 

I wasn't disagreeing, I was adding an additional thought. I apologize if I offended.

The scripture that you quoted in Revelations is in the future. Hence, although I have no doubt that what is described in the chapter will happen, it hasn't yet. Therefore, there is still a metaphor at work. As you have stated,we do sing a new song when we are redeemed.

However, I'm not sure what this has to do with the discussion at hand which I believe has more to do with styles of music and worship.

Steve

 

For a scholarly, devout treatment of Bible instruments and their use, visit:

Worship in the Melting Pot

By Dr. Peter Masters. Peter Masters is the pastor of the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Spurgeons's church.

 

Aaron-
The problem with your statement is that it is extra-Biblical. You cannot state that it is sin for anyone else since you have only your convictions to base your statement on. You may be under conviction not to listen to CCM or any other "rock" music. However, you may be depriving others of the blessings and encouragement similiar to those that you derive from your hymns.

Steve</font>[/QUOTE]I'm wondering if you've ever read Romans 14 or 1 Corinthians 8?

 

Sure have. There is a big difference between the "idol meat" and music.

First, unlike music, meat that was dedicated to idols was specifically banned for Jews in the Old Testament. Hence, there was a real issue when Jewish Christians ran into Gentile Christians who had no previous ban or prior conviction about the meat question. Don't forget, there were a group of Jews attempting to make Christianity a subset of Judaism. Unlike "idol meat" there has been no prior or current Biblical ban that covers a specific style of music. If anything, it seems that whatever the current music is is what gets banned. How else could you explain Handel's Messiah being decried as "profane and subversive" by some of its contemporary clergy? I suspect that in 100 years some of the music that we are debating today will be considered "classic" along with Wesley and Watts.

Second, unlike "idol meat" CCM is dedicated to God, not satan. That's a big difference. It's not as if these artists are getting up and denouncing Jesus. They are praising and worshipping God in the way that God has given them talent. CCM artists are attracting people to Christ. Who are we to question God's methods?

Third, Romans 14:1-3, states that neither side is to look down at the other. We are each responsible to God for our decisions. If someone told me that they were convicted about CCM, I would put on a hymn collection on the CD player. I wouldn't play CCM . I would also make a point of not discussing the subject. As a matter of practice, I always try to defer to the musical tastes of my guests.

However, I would also expect that the "weaker brother" would pay attention to the first part of Romans 14 and not lecture me on my choice. Would I stop listening when they weren't around? No. Neither have I plucked out my eye or chopped off my hand when they offended me.

Steve

 

Molly,
I just signed on to answer your post, so, I'm glad you asked. I do feel that some songs are trite and trivial. Worse yet, I feel that some songs get written for their commercial value only. No, I don't believe that calling something Christian makes it worthy of being sung. Far too much Christian music, writing, and art is shallow. I'm sure that you might be surprised to see me say that. Aaron probably is. .However, there are some gems amidst the trivial. To borrow a trite phrase...we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

My tastes in music are very wide. I literally enjoy everything from Renaissance music to Mozart to Big Band to Rock. For example, I like "And Can It Be" as well as "Shout to the Lord" (not as a medley). What I'm trying to say is that I don't look to see when a song was written as much as if it fits in with the message (doctrinally correct) as well as the mood. I wouldn't put a loud, celebratory song before Communion. Neither would I start a missionary conference with a serious, somber song.

Frankly, the problem sounds deeper than just music, it sounds like an issue of control. Biblically speaking, the worst is for one side to walk out. This breaks the testimony of the Church in the community and to your daughters. Maybe you can meet quietly with one of the couples from the "other" side to reasonably and rationally discuss your respective views. Be prepared that they are going to be as suspicious of you as you are of them. You might be surprised at what they are thinking. Work together towards a solution. Most importantly, PRAY. Pray before you ask the couple, pray when you meet with the couple, pray during the meeting, pray afterwards.

I realize that this may not be what you expected for an answer. I will pray with you that this be resolved for His greater glory.

Steve

 

DHK,
Could you please define what you feel is "devil's" music? and what does a song have to be to be considered a "new song"?

In Christ's gracious love,
Teresa

 

Molly I know once you become apart of a church it is so hard to leave. It sounds as though the church you attend is going in a different direction than what you are needing spiritually. There is nothing wrong with you leaving the church if you are not getting what you need out of the services. I have seen people leave a church and drag other members with them and that is what would be wrong. If a person choses to leave then they should just leave on good terms and don't try to bring others with them. There is a church out there that is the one meant for you. May God's Blessings be with you as your family seeks out the church He wants you to attend. ~Sheila~