RE: Contemporary Christian Music....

I don't think most will deny that, though I believe Jack Chick once wrote that Heavy Metal music had it's origins with the Druids (That would mean that Ozzfest is a Celtic music festival Let's bring our tartans and kilts ). Seriously though, African rhythms are part of African culture but that does not make it evil. African rhythms are also about great black Gospel music.

As for the Satanist link, it seems to be stuck in the 1980's Hell's Bells syndrome that believes the whole Rock music industry in run by a secret society of Satanists. I mean the guy mentions, " Stryper or Petra". O please Stryper hasn't existed for over a decade and Petra's glory days in CCM faded about 7 years ago. "Heaven's Metal" magazine had it's name changed years ago to Hard Music magazine when Metal declined in popularity and Christian metal barely exists today.

I suspect there is something dishonest about the article in that I suspect the writer is probably a Fundy Baptist pretending to be a Satanists in that his knowledge of contemporay music seems to be stuck back in the late 80's and early 90's. Many anti CCM bashers such as Jack Chick, Bill Gothard and the ridiculous Jeff Godwin often lie, twist and distort the truth. Many of us who are CCM supporters have serious problems with the current state of CCM but embracing slander is not the Christian way.

 

Then they would be denying that Rock and roll is drawn from a wide variety of sources.

 

I am glad I received so many responses to what I wrote. It seems that there are plenty out there who are, in one form or another, in favor of this type of music. Please do not misunderstand me. I do not consider this conversation a measuring-stick of your (or my) spirituality. That is not the issue. The issue is that music and our discernment of what is good and bad music has definite affects on our spiritual lives, and I believe that it is important that each believer establishes his basis for judgment on the Word of God. The URL article was simply a "bibliographic note" to what I was saying that even those not in Christian circles say that music is not amoral--meaning it is, in and of itself, neither good nor bad.

First of all, it seems that most did not really grasped the application of the article to what I was saying. This satanist is not writing to Christians. He has written this article as part of his satanist webpage. He is applauding Christian Rock and endorsing it to his followers as something great and wonderful.

The author of this article is saying that no matter what the words say, the music considered "Rock" or "Metal" has innate evil influences and affects. He LIKES this music for what it stands for, and for what it does to a person's emotions.

His reference to Christian music that historically lacks rhythm is obviously speaking of the conservative Christian music of past centuries, not what is called contemporary Christian music. The rhythm that is lacking is the dominant syncopation that has been added in much of the relatively new Christian music.

The fact that he misunderstands the Christian's view of emotions and their appropriateness is understandable, and at this point, I would have to agree with Smoke Eater concerning his logic, though I dare say the author is not only speaking of "healthy" emotions, but emotions and passions unbecoming to a Christian.

The purpose of mentioning this article was to show how this satanist belittles and despises Christianity and its faith, yet enjoys and actually promotes "Christian Rock". This is pretty heavy evidence--apart from the Word of God--against this type of music.


Secondly, "style" is to music what modesty is to dress. There are some styles that are not appropiate for the Christian, just as some clothing would not be considered approriate. The difficulty comes when judging what is and is not appropriate.

Baptist Believer, you mentioned that music should mirror a Christian world view. I do not agree. Basically, what I am dealing with at this point (I did not clarify myself here) is music in the church. Music in the Bible is always described as a form of worship of God and as a means of glorifying Him, as well as "speaking to yourselves in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts...UNTO THE LORD." The music in the church is for "interelationship" between believers, and between them and God. Keep the world out of it.

The comment on Mozart and Beethoven was to show the difference between their music and their lives. I was saying that one should be careful NOT to judge the song because a particular person composed it or sings it, one way or another. If we were to do that, we would have to throw the music of these two wonderful composers out the window. I am a well-trained musician with years of studies...trust me, they were not nice men.

The term Rock and Roll by the way DOES come from the activities the author of this article describes. The roots of the that music come from African rituals and voodoo among other things, but the TERM comes from that idea. If it represents these ideals, then this type of music--its very philosophy and application--has no place in the Christian's life. This is what was meant by saying the Devil's music (I think people have misinterpreted the meaning of that phrase--it does not mean he OWNS it, it means he manipulates it to his purposes) cannot be linked with "Christian" words and be considered good. (II Cor. 6:14-17) The two are in direct contrast of each other.

Sure you sin because YOU want to, but if you are allowing something in your life that tempts you to sin, what should you do with that "something"?

I am not condemning all secular music, nor am I condemning contemporary Christian music or its artists in general. Besides, that's not for me to decide. I am not judging anyone. I am simply saying that there are certain types of music, based on their philosophy, affects and associations, that are not healthy for the Christian.

I do not doubt your sincerity in your responses, but I do not make any apologies for what I said either. I will make this last statement and not bore some of you to tears any longer. Music does not "make or break" a Christian, but the music we listen to does have a tremendous affect on our spiritual responsiveness and resulting relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

God Bless,

Christian A. Lindsey

 

Be he doesn't show that it does. I'm happy taht he has a chance to express an opinion, but so what?

Unless he can show a reason, it's just his opinion and I, for one, would disagree.

How does this demonstrate anything?

My sister's not a Christian, but she has every 2nd Chapter of Acts record ever made (it's a long story). By the same standard, does this make soft, mellow, middle of the road folk that doesn't lend itself to heavy emotionalism evil?

In my time in Christian music, I met a lot of people who weren't Christians, but enjoyed Christian music.

Mark Heard, Bruce Cockburn, Buddy and Julie Miller, Leslie Phillips, Kerry Livgren, among others, are all Christians who do or have done Christian music that appeals to a wide cross section of people. So what?

Why?

I thought that was established and agreed upon. What does what someone chose to call it sixty years ago have with what someone chooses to do with it today?

That hasn't been established yet.

I agree. If music represents illicit sex and voodoo, then it has no place in a CHristian's life.

But, since we're talking about Christian music, which doesn't represent these things, so what?

You're talking in circles.

You still haven't established that all music of any one particular style represents any one thing.

Why?

Obviously, you should avoid those things that tempt you but in Matthew 5:27-30, we learn that we're still going to have to look within ourselves to find the root of the problem.

But you still haven't demonstrated that any one type of music shares the same "philosophy, 'affects' and associations" across the board.

For example, Aerosmith, Doug Sahm and Jimmy Buffett are all rock artists, but their music is all as different from one another as it can be.

"Walk This Way" and "Little Miss Magic" are both rock songs, but are as different in both style and content as you can imagine and the only thing they share is that the two guys who sing them live down the street from one another on Long Island.

I agree.

Mike

 

Actually, the terms “contemporary Christian music” and “Christian rock music” are so incredibly broad that I would hesitate to label myself as a supporter of “this type of music” without clarifying that I believe all music can be good or bad depending upon the lyrics, the intent of the performer and the context. I believe lyrics carry the moral weight of a song while the tune is neither inherently good or evil.

I fully agree.

Certainly, but in my opinion, the “satanist” was not very well informed or a credible basis of authority for Christians. Certainly a person can get stimulus or “energy” from music with a fast tempo (whether classical, contemporary Christian, rock, Southern Gospel, etc.) without listening to the words and then go out and do evil, but that is a problem with the person, not the music.

Please send me the URL of this “Satanist” Web page where this article appears in a private message so that I can research it myself. I tried a search on the internet and I couldn’t find it – except for the link you gave.

“Rock” and “Metal” are type very different things… Metal is always rock, but rock is only occasionally metal music. Personally, I don’t care for metal music, but that does not mean it is inherently evil.

The only music that doesn’t have rhythm is the music I play on piano or guitar. (I’m rhythmically challenged!) What he may be referring to is a pronounced rhythm, or danceable music… Music classical music is full of that too. So are traditional hymns.

We agree here as well!

Actually, it may just be an indicator that this fellow is not very bright or the music is of very high quality… You’ve already affirmed that he misunderstands the Christian perspective in this music.

Based on what authority? Certainly if music is anti-Christian or of very low quality, it is no appropriate for Christians to enjoy for personal or corporate edification. But if you are talking about styles of music, I would have to strongly disagree unless you can give me biblical evidence to the contrary.

Absolutely. Christian music should at least come from a viewpoint of Christian faith – even if it is not a religiously-themed piece.

Okay, that’s a little different. Music for worship should focus on God and songs of testimony and service.

Yes. But certainly you understand that music not focused on God is acceptable outside the context of worship… If I were to write a love song to my wife, that would be an acceptable song for a Christian.

I’m afraid you’ve misunderstood what I mean by “Christian worldview”. A worldview is a philosophical outlook on the world that colors perceptions and help create an integrated structure for human understanding. (Look it up in the dictionary if I don’t make sense here.) Essentially I’m saying that a Christian should look at the world with eyes of faith. I am not endorsing the “world system” or anything in the world except the goodness of God revealed in His creation.

Certainly Mozart was probably at least as bad as he was portrayed in “Amadeus”, but I understand the jury is still out on Beethoven and his faith. Certainly he was irritable and sinful, but so was Luther. Beethoven also had some severe health problems (lead-poisoning, etc.) that probably caused a lot of his moods. In any case, I agree that the source of the music is irrelevant to whether or not the music is acceptable for Christians.

Even if it does, I thought you just made a good case for judging the music on it’s own merits instead of the creator of the music???

Nonsense… See the point you just made about Beethoven and Mozart.

This is referring to people, not music. Furthermore, this is about leaving paganism and paganistic religion. You still have yet to demonstrate that “rock” (whatever you mean by the term) is necessarily pagan.

Yes. Pagan religion and Christian religion are incompatible. Tunes and styles created by non-Christians/pagans and Christian lyrics are compatible, since the meaning is found in the lyrics.

You should get rid of it. My music does not tempt me. If your music tempts you, it’s time to get rid of it – but don’t assume everyone shares the same weaknesses.

Liquor has no temptation for me. I can live around it without facing any temptation. (I used to keep a bottle of Everclear in my home – I confiscated it from a student at the private high school I used to work at – and used it only for medicinal (external) purposes. I had not inclination to drink the stuff. I had a friend give me a bottle of beer four months ago. I put it in the fridge thinking I might want to try it sometime. I haven’t cared enough to even open the bottle. I tried drinking red wine for my cardiovascular health about a year ago (a doctor recommended it), but I don’t really care for it and I’ve gradually stopped drinking it – but that’s me.

Other people have real problems with alcohol and they would have consumed that Everclear, the beer and worked their way through countless bottles of wine during the last year because they have that weakness… But that does not make *me* wrong for occasionally having an alcoholic drink or having it around the house.

Excellent.

And you still have yet to demonstrate this… Maybe you should say that some forms of music, regardless of lyrics, may not be good for some Christians?

Fine.

I’m not crying.

Yep. If we listen to music with bad theology or music that celebrates evil, it will harm us.

Thanks for your input!

 

christian music should glorify God not the man singing it. I personally don't like contermpory music, however it get's the young people in. i don't agree with that tatic but once again they are getting them in with it. i like southern gospel music there is nothing like it. it puts a feeling down in my soul like nothing else has ever done.


GOD BLESS AMERICA

 

christfollower55,

So, what you are saying is that using CCM works, but you still don't like it. If it works, why not use it, or as the KJVO love to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

This comment reminds of a story I heard about the late Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

Following a run of poor attendances at sunday evening gospel services some of the church members suggested that the service should be livened up with special singing performances etc., which would draw more people into the church.

MLJ sarcastically asked them if he should put up posters around London inviting people to come and see him preaching in the nude. He guaranteed a full church.

I hope you can see that just because something draws crowds to a church it doesn't mean that it is right.

God Bless

Enda

 

Edna,
You are comparing apples and oranges. To come to church nude is not the same as allowing people to enjoy music that is contemporary to their generation.

You could attract people to come to church by doing almost any absurd thing. Being able to worship God with CCM is hardly absurd.

 

Terry,

You suggested that the use of CCM in church was justified because it works(ie.gets people into church)

My point was, that wheather or not CCM draws crowds to the church is absolutely irrelevant.

If you want to consider wheather something should be allowed in worship you don't start with the question of wheather people enjoy it or not. You consider wheather scripture allows it and leave it at that.

I am not addressing the rights and wrongs of CCM, I've been down that road before. Nevertheless I think that if some of the Puritans were around today they would find much of our modern worship totally absurd.

God Bless

Enda

 

I hope you can see that just because something draws crowds to a church it doesn't mean that it is right.

God Bless

Enda [/QB][/QUOTE]

I couldn't agree more!

 

I see things from a different perspective that you do, evidently. I think we should use every means at our disposal, if it is not evil, to attract people to our churches. Being that I do not think that CCM is evil, I think it should be used. In fact, I do not think that any particular style of music is, in and of itself, evil. Therefore, I would use any style of music at the appropriate time to attract those who are lost.

My experience is that some churches like to stay fifty or one hundred years in the past. I think that they do this because it causes them to be rejected by many today. As odd as this may seem, I think they do this so that they can feel special. I had one pastor say to me many years ago that we were the only church in our city that really taught proper doctrine. I was amazed because he was serious. I live in Houston, Texas, the forth largest city in the United States. At that time the population here, including the surrounding suburbs was around two million people.

 

Terry,

Your desire to see sinners brought into the church is commendable but I don't think your methods are supported by scripture.

We don't want to see unsaved people in church so that we can have fellowship with them, we want to see them getting saved. They will be saved only through the foolishness of preaching .

I would say that if someone is finding church entertaining then they are not being challenged by the preaching and therefore not being brought under conviction of sin.

Entertaining services which draw large crowds are very dangerous in that people start to think that just because they are attending a church and enjoying the services that they are saved. This can leave them with false assurance and in many ways worse off than they were before they started attending church.

God Bless

Enda

 

Edna,

First, you say that we need to win the lost, but they should not be comfortable in church. Then you say don't use music that will get them in church in the first place. If you don't get them into the church who will you preach the Gospel to.

I say that CCM is not for the lost; I don't know any lost people who listen to it. It is for the saved. It is so that they can express their love for God with a musical style that they like. It just so happens that this style of music is more familiar to the un-churched, not the message, just the musical style.

BTW, what would be wrong with using a style of music that will, perhaps, cause people to come to church and then preach the Gospel to them. After all, it is the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ that they need to hear in order to be saved.

What is the difference in inviting children to come and rewarding them when the do attend. This is done in almost every bus ministry.

 

Terry,

I'm beginning to wonder if you're actually reading my posts. I never said this. I said that just because something (in this case CCM) brings crowds into a church it doesn't mean that it is right to have it in church.

In your earlier post you said 'if it works, we should use it', show me where it says that in the Bible.

When you talk about the unsaved feeling comfortable in church, well thats fine, but if they are feeling comfortable they are not experiencing conviction of sin.

Should we try to make the unsaved feel comfortable in our churches?

NO, we should be hospitable of course, but we shouldn't be content just seeing them at church, if we truly want to see them saved we will want to see them being convicted by the Holy Spirit, anyone who has truly experienced this will say that they were not comfortable in this state. That is what draws them to the Lord, they need to be cleansed from their sin. This is the whole purpose of inviting them to church in the first place.

I'm not suggesting that Christians should feel uncomfortable in church, but again just because CCM makes them feel comfortable doesn't mean that it is right. The pattern for worship is clearly defined in scripture, this is how we must judge wheather something is right or not, people's feelings don't come into it at all. It is God that we are worshipping, it is Him we are trying to please, not ourselves. What we like is not always what God likes.

I am not knocking CCM here, wheather it should be used in worship is another argument, what I'm disagreeing with is your basis for using it.

If you think I'm wrong, show me exactly where I am going wrong.

God Bless

Enda (NB not Edna)

 

Enda (sorry about the spelling),

This has turned into a hugh misunderstanding. I do not necessarily believe that as long as something works it should always be used. On this point I agree with you. I just do not see any violation of Scripture with using CCM, whether it is in church or out of church. I just like CCM music.

Somehow this discussion has gotten out of hand. If I have been the cause I apologize.

BTW, I do not dislike hymns, southern gospel, country gospel, black gospel, or many other styles of christian music; I just like CCM better.

 

Enda is exactly right...churches allover are accepting things based on what? It works? Works for what? The prgamtic church growth movement has woatered down God's word so that it is not confrontive but a feel good style service which the music has much to do with this...actually if I remember corretcly,Jesus said He would grow His churches...and He put much more emphasis on preaching the word than all this other. Man's ways are just that,man's. We need to be trying to be biblical in all we do.

Unfortunately,Terry,there are many churches who have bought into this....actual;ly there are probably very few churches holding to God's ways. The world's ways are much more FUN! The emphasis shifts when this becomes the focus...

 

Molly is right. This modern Christian movement is very large in size but very small in affect. The tools of that movement are ungodly music and ungodly bibles, both of which do extreme harm. Their philosophy is "easy believism." I hate to see a preacher on TV give an invitation at the end of the service and he asks all those who want to be saved to come down front, raise their hand and repaet a little prayer. I do believe that salvation is that simple but it must come from a persons heart and they must first be convicted of the Holy Spirit. If they are not convicted it is very doubtful that they trusted the Lord. I believe some may get saved through that method, but probably only 1 out of 100. This brings up an interesting question. If all those people who raise their hand do not truly get saved, are they given a false hope of salvation and are still bound for hell? I believe so.