Ccm

Emotions aren't from the body, they're from the heart which is deceitful above all and desperately wicked.

 

You've yet to answer the questions I posed.

 

Aaron, your arguments almost made me laugh...but then I realized that was emotional, so I repented.

 

Heart, in that context, is a metaphor. That's what the emotion centers in the brain are for.

 

No, when Paul speaks of the flesh, he is primarily speaking of the carnal nature, the natural man.

 

Um, you thought I was speaking of the muscle?

 

Oh, and emotions don't come from the brain, either.

 

Where do they come from?

 

The pinky toe, I guess...or maybe the adenoids. I've always wondered what they were for...

 

Emotions come from your spirit. They are the works of your heart.

 

So, the body isn't corrupt, but the heart is. Um, okay. Last time I checked, my heart was part of my body.

My dog has emotions, and he doesn't have a spirit.

 

Then what is the "emotion center" in your brain for?

 

When David was described as a man after God's own heart, to what part of God's body was being referred?

It has life, which is more than the sum of its parts. But no more about dogs. Christ did not come to us in the likeness of dogs. We're speaking of men, and, for now, the spirit of a man.

 

The Scriptures don't speak to the "emotion center" of one's brain. You can speculate all you want about things you really know nothing about, or we can speak of the things that are revealed to us in the Scriptures.

They speak of the heart of man and the corruption that flows from it, and they speak of the Spirit of God and Its fruits. They also speaks of the body as a vessel and a temple. They tell us that it is mere dust. The life that is in it is not part of it. When the body is destroyed, we still exist either in glory or in torment, and we will still think and feel.

 

Why does "heart" in that context have to be referring to the spiritual? Also, I agree with you that there is a conscious intermediate state between one's death and bodily resurrection.

 

Some of the Psalms in the Bible are repetitive.

 

Yes, but the overall context of that is that if people are going to trust in their heritage (physical lineage, culture, etc) as making them closer to God, they are going the wrong way, because of the fact that the only thing that gives us is a carnal nature.
So to truly heed Paul's message, people need to drop this division of cultures as proving which music is good or not. All the cultures are carnal. Some, more in a "sensuous" way, and others in a more formalistic or stoic way. All the same to God. To ignore that is to make the same mistake as the people Paul was correcting!

 

The fact that someone would be described as being after God's own heart dismisses your position that the heart/emotion is corrupt. God doesn't make decisions based on emotion, yet David is after God's own heart.

Your assertion to condemn CCM based on the notion that it evokes emotion just doesn't line up logically or scripturally.

 

I think several things come into play regarding ccm:

1.The purpose of the church gathered. Some see that as to proclaim the gospel, and some see it as a time for mystical worship where the worshipper enters into a state of intimacy with God. Definitely, different music types will be needed.

2. The difference between congregational singing and solo singing. Definitely some old hymns and some ccm are beautiful, well written, performance numbers. Not suitable for the average untrained congregant to attempt. Often poorly done with a song leader who only THINKS she sings like a recording artist.

3. Personal taste. It really IS ok to not like traditional music, southern gospel, rap, and yes, ccm. Doesn't make one less spiritual, less evangelistic, or less "with it." Speaking only of my town, I get sick of hearing how "all the young people will leave unless we do ccm. Don't you care about the lost" ad infinitum, when the truth is we didn't start losing the young UNTIL contemporary worship began.

4. Theology. I am not a Pentecostal. I am not Word of Faith. I am not Charismatic. I am not a Universalist. I do not believe in works salvation. And yet a great deal of ccm espouses those theologies. Why on earth would I sing them?

5. Theology of style: that is, the medium is part of the method. Read "Christless Christianity" for a good explanation of why a Reformed service should look and sound different from a Pentecostal, or a Wesleyan, or a Word of Faith, etc. Do we really want people not to be able to recognize a Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, Lutheran, etc service unless we tell them which it is?

6. Timelessness vs planned obsolescence. Some folks believe the church should reflect the timelessness of the gospel. Others think it should chase every fad and trend.

I believe quite firmly this is something for the local church to decide. However, whatever type of music the church chooses, it should not be surprised if some leave to find an atmosphere more conducive to worship for them. And the leavers should not be criticized for doing exactly what the stayer's did: worshipping in a way that fits them. I get really bugged when someone comes into a traditional church (and it would work the other way round), works hard to get it changed to contemporary, then basically calls those that leave heathens for taking their tithe with them.

 

I won't touch the emotions stuff...

What I do want to address is a part from the beginning of the thread where someone said something about songs that could be to Jesus or a boyfriend. I agree and disagree.

I agree that there are songs that could go both ways. I avoid those.

But singing to Jesus as the lover of my soul is something that I do from the heart and it helps me. Singing the PCD line "Jesus, I am so in love with you..." helps me.

That's my only input.