Oh no! It's MODERN!

Yes, what do you call "worldly methods?" Or, what do you mean by that? Seems like a slam on anyone who would use methods like taking popular songs, changing the lyrics, and using them to get the attention of someone who may be lost. Just this past Saturday night at our "trunk and treat" that band was "praying in the classroom" instead of "smoking in the boys room." It worked great and gave out a positive message.

 

Every time I hear people complain about "modern", I get the urge to watch the first 5 minutes of "The Music Man".

 

I call worldly methods using a Motley Crue song to try to bring others to Christ. You really have no clue as to where we should draw the line between worldly and Christian do you? The better question would be, what do you consider worldly? I think the answer to that would reveal a lot, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

Is there something in scripture that says you can't use secular music as a tool in spreading the Gospel?

 

(took off your top quote because I agreed)

I question the part where you say "if the motive is to draw a crowd that wouldn't otherwise come..."

Why would that not be a motive that would please Christ? Isn't it part of our duty to draw as many people as close to Christ as possible?

No, it is our duty to please God, and if this includes doing some of these things, then yes we do them, but don't get this backwards. You might think it is a small thing, but it leads to error. When we start doing things for God, assuming he is behind us when we are doing it, we have placed ourselves in the driver's seat. Instead, we should be led of God when it comes to what our church does.

It is better to obey than to sacrifice.

Think about that some more. If you're missing a whole segment of your Christian community...for example, the deaf and hard of hearing because using modern visual aids is not old fashioned, are you pleasing Christ?

If one insists one using the Queen's English in a day and age where people have more difficulty understanding it and would grow better using the same dialect and words they use in their daily lives, is that pleasing to Christ?

People are going to start finding reasons to stay at home if they can't learn and grow in their church. People wither away spiritually when they do that. We don't want that. Plain and simple and old fashioned is just fine, but IF modern resources are available and IF they will help keep more Christians on track, why not take advantage of them?

How is that motive wrong? Isn't it a major part of what we're supposed to be doing?

You are too worried about the people finding excuses. The ungodly will always find excuses as they always have. I have no problem with providing technology to increase the understanding in the church, but this is a far cry from introducing new things to draw people into the church. We are to compel people to come to Christ, anyway. The church is for the training and preparation of the saints to storm the gates of hell.

The fact is, I could increase the attendance at our church a number of ways. The results would be fantastic, and I could report to my fellows that we have twice as many people coming to church now. I could give a way a car, I could have magic shows before the preaching, I could have a clown come in and entertain the children, all of which would probably increase attendance. None of these things, however, are found in scripture. The end never jusitifies the means. The population of the church does not determine the church's spirituality.

That being said, we should do everything within our means to obey God's requirements for a local assembly and consider Him first in all things. We will go as He directs, but we will not step out in front of Him and expect Him to follow.

 

Nothing that would satisfy your requirements, but I'll post it anyway.

Rom 12:2
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

1Jn 2:15
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

Gal 1:10
For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

 

If using Motley Crue to spread the gospel is not conforming to the world, I don't know what is.

 

Where was a scripture violated except in the hallowed halls of your own personal opinion? And, yet you would lecture me on knowing the difference between being worldly and not being worldly. Now we are getting to the crux of the issue. You don't know the men and women in this band. You don't know how Christ has changed their lives. You can't get passed the fact that they aren't using a hymn or a southern gospel song that meets with your personal approval.

 

Paul also spoke of becoming all things to all men that he might win just a few to Christ. Perhaps it is someone else who needs a lecture on what is truly worldly and that which is of the pharisee.

 

I am an old-time Baptist Fundamentalist. I sat under the "stars" of Baptist Fundamentalism in the late 1970's and early 1980's when the movement was in it's zenith.

Younger people may not know that there was a time when IFB churches would use "secular" methods to get people to come to church who otherwise would not come! Many churches still do although ours does not.

Secular methods such as having special entertainment (anyone remember "Geraldine and Ricky" or Cowboy Tom Williams?), giving away food, and even secular - YES, SECULAR concerts.

I remember when we had a world-famous pianist come to perform at Highland Park Baptist Church. Her name escapes me now, but her repertiore was almost completely secular music- mostly Gilbert and Sullivan or Rogers and Hammerstein, as I recall.

So the use of "secular" methods to attract a crowd predates our current age by far.

"Secular", like beauty, lies in the mind of the beholder the majority of the time. Should we never rent a "secular" building in which to start a church? Is a guitar or a piano "secular"?

Again the deacons are threatening me so I must clo

 

I like you Mex!!!

 

Enlighten me Sag. Where is the proper place to draw the line between Worldly and Godly?

 

Not all that is secular is ungodly. I never claimed that. I love classical music.

 

Your defensiveness is showing. I must have struck a nerve. Lecture me then already.

I will stick to my original reason for posting to this thread. Everything we do in the church should be to the glory of God and not to please men. Is this an unusual belief now?

 

Okay then- would I be wrong to label you a hypocrite for listening to "classical" music but damning others whose taste runs more to CCM or rock?

Please explain what makes listening to "The Sound of Music" any less "secular" than listening to "Kickstart My Heart".

(Disclaimer- I am not a Crue fan or a fan of any other rock group- not my style.)

 

I didn't damn anybody for anything if I recall correctly. Thank you and Sag though for calling me a pharisee and a hypocrite because I said using the world's music to win the world was ineffective. It is obvious you two don't want to argue on the merits, but just want to get overly emotional and lash out at a percieved enemy. Okay, do what you want, but answer me this:

Where do you draw the line between worldly and godly, Mex?

I have moved this to a new thread. It is an important question that needs to be answered, and is not *necessarily* germaine to this particular discussion.

That said, I'll refer to my prior post. Essentially we should follow Christ in our church and not expect Christ to follow us.

 

Is "everything we do in the church ... to the glory of God and not to please men" in truth??? Does having air conditioning please God or men? Does having a sound system please God or men? Does having carpet please God or men?