Songs and Christian Liberty

[Charlie24]

Yes. But "liberal" in its original context - willing to respect opinions different from one's own.

If you read my post then you would have seen that this generation of believers is completely different from what the world is becoming.

The thing is, the difference is less superficial than you may like.

When we find ourselves unable to encourage Christians who are different from us we reveal a serious problem regardless of our age.


I need to add..... when I say IFB churches that are mired in tradition are dying out (Jesus promises to "spew" the out) I do not mean their children or grandchildren will not have a church. They just will not be trapped in the same prejudices.

It was like that with the churches who considered traditional hymns (when those were new) too worldly. Those churches no longer exist, but odds are at least some of their children joined churches that sang traditional hymns. And very shortly those hymn singing churches became strong.

To everything there is a season.

But Jon, I'm 70 years old now, I've seen what the IFB was and what it is now in those 70 years.

Brother it's declining. We are one of the very few left that will fight Satan tooth and nail to uphold the old paths that Jeremiah spoke of.

But I see weakness today that I didn't see 60 years ago, but the attacks of Satan have increased since them, much higher intensity.

 

[Ascetic X]

An observation -

Churches that prioritize their traditions and preferences have been lamenting the decline of "Christianity" for ages….

What people lament and view as Satan attacking the church is in reality a decline in traditions….

The theories and theologies that once separated Christians have become secondary to the gospel of Christ…

What so many morn is not in reality a decline in Christianity (although they do not realize this) but a decline in their traditions…

The decline of Christianity that I see is comprised of mega church pastors and youth ministry leaders being caught committing adultery and horrendous crimes against vulnerable young women.

The Church Leaders website documents these items weekly.

ChurchLeaders

ChurchLeaders.com is dedicated to resourcing, informing, and connecting a community of church leaders for greater Kingdom impact worldwide. They provide church ideas and news for church pastors, youth ministry, children's ministry ideas, worship, volunteers, and spiritual growth for all ages.

churchleaders.com

Then there is the Dove Awards featuring gay activist musicians proudly endorsing abominations.

Almost all the denominations and many churches are going woke and embracing the Sodomite agenda.

In addition, the preaching in mainstream denominations tends to be more like positive thinking seminars, with sports anecdotes, diversity lectures, corny jokes, but no gospel, no Bible teaching, no altar calls. Church kids love Harry Potter as much as heathen children. The charismatic churches are exhibiting bizarre behaviors that seem more influenced by shamans and witch doctors than solid biblical teachings.

There may be pockets of revival sprinkled here and there, and I pray they overwhelm the forces of darkness, but apostasy in the churches is spreading rapidly. Female bishops and lesbian deacons are common.

Mammonism, libertinism, sloppy dress, rock concerts, and new age ideologies have replaced the respectful, devout spiritual traditions that used to result in true conversions and reverent discipleship.

Barna Research verifies how such a huge percentage of pastors are addicted to adult entertainment, divorce rates in the churched are similar to the unchurched, and contemporary worship bands indulge in alcohol and drugs, just like pagan musicians. See the story of the Newsboys for one example.

 

[JonC]

But Jon, I'm 70 years old now, I've seen what the IFB was and what it is now in those 70 years.

Brother it's declining. We are one of the very few left that will fight Satan tooth and nail to uphold the old paths that Jeremiah spoke of.

But I see weakness today that I didn't see 60 years ago, but the attacks of Satan have increased since them, much higher intensity.

Yea...I get it. The church I grew up is declining as well (it was much like yours in traditions).

In a way I miss it. I also miss that green bubble gum we could by for a couple cents at the gas station. They were my favorite.

I agree that Satan's activities seem to have increased. The world has gotten worse. Or...the world has revealed itself more instead of being a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Many churches have died. Many have turned away from Christ.

BUT Christistianity...from everything I see....the churches that are here and alive (the one that will pick up when you and I are gone) is much stronger than the church it is replacing.

They just is not the churches as we would have envisioned them. I suppose God works this way. As the eorld grows dark and mean the churches persevere in a form befitting the challenge.

If we are honest, the churches we grew up in (IFB churches, SBC churches) would not weather legitimate persecution. Sure, we loved to talk about it. But our churches would not have weathered it. It would mean getting rid of so much our churches held dear.


But the churches I see among the newer generation, the ones that will replace us, is not shackled with the traditions that anchor many churches down today. They are stronger in so many ways.


I do not know if this is a transition before greater persecution or if they will be the ones to weather the worst of it.

I do know that if they had to worship without a formal church building they would not skip a beat. If they had to gather as a congregation outside of the public eye they could easily. They do not wear "church clothes" and they already meet in homes several times a week.

But the most important part (and, to be perfectly honest, the part that scares me) is that their faith is stronger than the faith of our churches in the past. They are doing what our churches just talked about.


I think you just need to give God a little more credit. He will always have a people, always have churches. This means churches will change to meet the challenges they will face.


That is why I do not mourn churches dying out. I see their replacement. And their replacement is much stronger and more faithful than those being replaced became.

 

[JonC]

The decline of Christianity that I see is comprised of mega church pastors and youth ministry leaders being caught committing adultery and horrendous crimes against vulnerable young women.

I agree. This is why I say we should look elsewhere to see God growing other churches.

Our world is growing darker and crueler. I suppose a lot of this was present but hidden. Now the evil is in our face.

These churches that welcome the evil in are not churches (they are dead).

But many churches are dying, not because they let evil in but because they cannot change to meet the evil that exists. They cling to tradition. These are not dead, but they have lost their First Love (tradition has taken His place).

I truly believe God is moving among younger generations. What I see is a church that can weather persecution where ours could not.

They meet weekly in homes already, so if they lost the ability to go to a church building they would easily adapt.

They do not value superficial appearances. They can gather and witness to others even through persecution where many traditional churches could not.

For encouragement....look to the younger generation of faithful believers. You will see God working.

Too many focus too much on Satan's work and not enough on God's work. Focus on His work rather than Satan's work. I find that better for the soul.

 

[JonC]

There may be pockets of revival sprinkled here and there, and I pray they overwhelm the forces of darkness, but apostasy in the churches is spreading rapidly. Female bishops and lesbian deacons are common.

What we see is a younger generation (with some of us old folk) picking up the mantle that had been dropped.

We know exactly why churches die. We know why they are dying. We cannot blame it on Satan. We know because Jesus told us.

Some have lost their First Love and are in danger of dying. They replaced Jesus with theology and tradition, forgetting from whence they came. Some have adopted the idols of the world and left God's Word behind. Some tolerate sexual immorality. Some are dead.

Jesus did not blame Satan or the world for the sickness in the churches. The blame fell on the churches themselves.

That is why I have no doubt that churches who cling to tradition, are condemning Christians for the clothes they wear and the type of praise they sing, will die unless they change. Jesus said so. It will be so.

Therefore we should not morn the death of these churches, even those who become nothing but secular organizations. We should not morn the death if so many IFB churches who are trapped in their own tradition. They were warned by God and did not heed His warning.

Instead look for what God is doing with the faithful. We literally have God's play book. We know exactly why thise churches die. And we know that He keeps His church alive.

 

[Charlie24]

Yea...I get it. The church I grew up is declining as well (it was much like yours in traditions).

In a way I miss it. I also miss that green bubble gum we could by for a couple cents at the gas station. They were my favorite.

I agree that Satan's activities seem to have increased. The world has gotten worse. Or...the world has revealed itself more instead of being a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Many churches have died. Many have turned away from Christ.

BUT Christistianity...from everything I see....the churches that are here and alive (the one that will pick up when you and I are gone) is much stronger than the church it is replacing.

They just is not the churches as we would have envisioned them. I suppose God works this way. As the eorld grows dark and mean the churches persevere in a form befitting the challenge.

If we are honest, the churches we grew up in (IFB churches, SBC churches) would not weather legitimate persecution. Sure, we loved to talk about it. But our churches would not have weathered it. It would mean getting rid of so much our churches held dear.


But the churches I see among the newer generation, the ones that will replace us, is not shackled with the traditions that anchor many churches down today. They are stronger in so many ways.


I do not know if this is a transition before greater persecution or if they will be the ones to weather the worst of it.

I do know that if they had to worship without a formal church building they would not skip a beat. If they had to gather as a congregation outside of the public eye they could easily. They do not wear "church clothes" and they already meet in homes several times a week.

But the most important part (and, to be perfectly honest, the part that scares me) is that their faith is stronger than the faith of our churches in the past. They are doing what our churches just talked about.


I think you just need to give God a little more credit. He will always have a people, always have churches. This means churches will change to meet the challenges they will face.


That is why I do not mourn churches dying out. I see their replacement. And their replacement is much stronger and more faithful than those being replaced became.

That's what the true IFB is all about with it's peculiar ways, the things that folks joke about and condemn as foolishness.

We are fighting the good fight of faith, as Paul said, to preserve it and give no ground to the end.

 

[JonC]

That's what the true IFB is all about with it's peculiar ways, the things that folks joke about and condemn as foolishness.

We are fighting the good fight of faith, as Paul said, to preserve it and give no ground to the end.

I believe it is wrong for people to criticize the IFB Christians for how they worship. The music they prefer, the clothes they wear, even the order of their services (the ones I've attended) are their expressions of worship.

But often the condemnation (that I encounter) of IFB churches is not in their worship, dress or music (as it is very common in SBC churches as well).

The condemnation I encounter deals with some (hopefully the exception rather than standard) IFB members condemning the worship of other believers.

I remember several members of an IFB church yelling at a friend's daughter (they lived across the street from the church). She was about 9 years old and playing outside wearing shorts. They were telling her that she was going to Hell for wearing shorts. I believe that is the exception as this is not the behavior of IFB members I know. But it is nevertheless what comes to my mind when I think IFB.


I am in no way condemning your style of worship. But I am saying much of the ground you are holding onto is not biblical (although I get it is your expression of biblical principles). It is not the fight Christoans are called to fight or the faith we are told to hold on to the end. It is your expression of that faith.

As such, the IFB churches will continue to decline as they have, in a palatable way, lost their First Love by prioritizing their expression of the faith over the faith itself.

I cannot say that is good or bad.

I would think that this expression, these traditions designed to keep the faithful faithful, are aspects that an older generation cannot change because it is so ingrained into their worldview and church culture.

It is good that these believers will have a place to worship in their way, with their traditions and preferences, hopefully for the remainder of their life.

It is bad that many (IFB and SBC churches) are dead and, if Jesus is right, will be spewed out or change by finding again their First Love (priortizing Christ over tradition).

Either way, this tradition is subjective to a generation that is dying. At 70, and me at 57, I doubt either of us will fully experience its death. I may....from the nursing home.


The sad part for me is that you are unable to take comfort and rejoice in the work of God today, even as you morn the decline of a culture that - if we are honest - has been in decline for decades.

Maybe that is a sign of my age. I am young enough to separate my expression of the faith from the faith itself. But I am old enough to rejoice in God's work that I may not see in its fullest extent.

You and I grew up in a declining church culture. This next generation will grow up in a stronger church.

 

[JonC]

Brother it's declining. We are one of the very few left that will fight Satan tooth and nail to uphold the old paths that Jeremiah spoke of.

But I see weakness today that I didn't see 60 years ago, but the attacks of Satan have increased since them, much higher intensity.

Read the Bible.

What you see in the world is of Satan. Some of it is new. Some of it is evil that has been unmasked (the wolves are no longer dressing like sheep).

BUT what you see in the church is not Satan. Jesus was clear on this. Churches die (whether by abandonment of the faith to embrace the world or abandoning their First Love to prioritize their culture, traditions, preferences and expressions).

Jesus places the decline and death of churches on the churches themselves, not on Satan.

 

[Charlie24]

I believe it is wrong for people to criticize the IFB Christians for how they worship. The music they prefer, the clothes they wear, even the order of their services (the ones I've attended) are their expressions of worship.

But often the condemnation (that I encounter) of IFB churches is not in their worship, dress or music (as it is very common in SBC churches as well).

The condemnation I encounter deals with some (hopefully the exception rather than standard) IFB members condemning the worship of other believers.

I remember several members of an IFB church yelling at a friend's daughter (they lived across the street from the church). She was about 9 years old and playing outside wearing shorts. They were telling her that she was going to Hell for wearing shorts. I believe that is the exception as this is not the behavior of IFB members I know. But it is nevertheless what comes to my mind when I think IFB.


I am in no way condemning your style of worship. But I am saying much of the ground you are holding onto is not biblical (although I get it is your expression of biblical principles). It is not the fight Christoans are called to fight or the faith we are told to hold on to the end. It is your expression of that faith.

As such, the IFB churches will continue to decline as they have, in a palatable way, lost their First Love by prioritizing their expression of the faith over the faith itself.

I cannot say that is good or bad.

I would think that this expression, these traditions designed to keep the faithful faithful, are aspects that an older generation cannot change because it is so ingrained into their worldview and church culture.

It is good that these believers will have a place to worship in their way, with their traditions and preferences, hopefully for the remainder of their life.

It is bad that many (IFB and SBC churches) are dead and, if Jesus is right, will be spewed out or change by finding again their First Love (priortizing Christ over tradition).

Either way, this tradition is subjective to a generation that is dying. At 70, and me at 57, I doubt either of us will fully experience its death. I may....from the nursing home.


The sad part for me is that you are unable to take comfort and rejoice in the work of God today, even as you morn the decline of a culture that - if we are honest - has been in decline for decades.

Maybe that is a sign of my age. I am young enough to separate my expression of the faith from the faith itself. But I am old enough to rejoice in God's work that I may not see in its fullest extent.

You and I grew up in a declining church culture. This next generation will grow up in a stronger church.

I suppose you can see in me why the IFB is so attacked.

We can't help it, Jon, we are bold and outspoken to the point of fault in some cases. I realize that.

Of late I've been comparing it to Trump, he has the characteristics to make a great IFB.

The win at all costs, the determination to see it through to the end, the I don't care what you think this is what we are going to do attitude is exactly what we are.

It's not so much the world that rejects our approach it's the religious world that rejects us, and I can see why, but we have the ambition of Trump, love us or hate us, we are who we are.

 

[JonC]

I suppose you can see in me why the IFB is so attacked.

We can't help it, Jon, we are bold and outspoken to the point of fault in some cases. I realize that.

Of late I've been comparing it to Trump, he has the characteristics to make a great IFB.

The win at all costs, the determination to see it through to the end, the I don't care what you think this is what we are going to do attitude is exactly what we are.

It's not so much the world that rejects our approach it's the religious world that rejects us, and I can see why, but we have the ambition of Trump, love us or hate us, we are who we are.

It is not that the religious world rejects your approach to the faith, or worship. IFB churches are identical to most SBC churches with the exception of the popularity of KJVO.

The religious world rejects the IFB condemnation towards them, even towards churches that are faithful to Scripture, because they do not share how the IFB expresses their faith.

@Charlie24.

I have a question. You posted a picture of you...did not poke back when I posted a picture of Gavin Newsom dressed the same way (which was kinda disappointing...I like being poked back...it's all fun until somebody puts an eye out and then its a sport).

When I was growing up it woukd have been taboo to wear a suit without a tie. If young enough, we would wear a tie without a jacket (usually a clip on tie).

When did churches adopt that change in business casual attire?

Don't get me wrong - I like it. But I was wondering when this changed to match secular attire.

 

[Charlie24]

It is not that the religious world rejects your approach to the faith, or worship. IFB churches are identical to most SBC churches with the exception of the popularity of KJVO.

The religious world rejects the IFB condemnation towards them, even towards churches that are faithful to Scripture, because they do not share how the IFB expresses their faith.

@Charlie24.

I have a question. You posted a picture of you...did not poke back when I posted a picture of Gavin Newsom dressed the same way (which was kinda disappointing...I like being poked back...it's all fun until somebody puts an eye out and then its a sport).

When I was growing up it woukd have been taboo to wear a suit without a tie. If young enough, we would wear a tie without a jacket (usually a clip on tie).

When did churches adopt that change in business casual attire?

Don't get me wrong - I like it. But I was wondering when this changed to match secular attire.

I remember and still have some of those old clip-on ties from the old days, never wear them just a memorabilia thing.

You're talking about the loose-nit IBF whereas I'm speaking of the traditional stand by the stuff IBF. There is a huge difference.

I noticed in one of your posts you mentioned you don't like anything around your neck, such as a tie. I have those same feelings, I just don't like it.

I usually wear a tie on Sunday morning service but not the evening service or Wed. night service. But I haven't been attending the Wed. night service for the past few months, can't drive with this vertigo attacking me at will and who knows when.

We don't have a dress code, there has never been one. As I have said before, our pastor believes in sound doctrine preaching and letting the individual come their own convictions.

Even in the old days when I was being raised up in the old IFB Church there was no dress code, but the pastor encouraged a suit and tie for service. He said when he was in school, BJU, his first suits were hand me downs and from the Good Will type places really cheap.

 

[Charlie24]

I remember and still have some of those old clip-on ties from the old days, never wear them just a memorabilia thing.

You're talking about the loose-nit IBF whereas I'm speaking of the traditional stand by the stuff IBF. There is a huge difference.

I noticed in one of your posts you mentioned you don't like anything around your neck, such as a tie. I have those same feelings, I just don't like it.

I usually wear a tie on Sunday morning service but not the evening service or Wed. night service. But I haven't been attending the Wed. night service for the past few months, can't drive with this vertigo attacking me at will and who knows when.

We don't have a dress code, there has never been one. As I have said before, our pastor believes in sound doctrine preaching and letting the individual come their own convictions.

Even in the old days when I was being raised up in the old IFB Church there was no dress code, but the pastor encouraged a suit and tie for service. He said when he was in school, BJU, his first suits were hand me downs and from the Good Will type places really cheap.

As far as the women in our Church, you won't see any of the members wearing pants/slacks.

There are female visitors who come in wearing pants, and if they are saved and join the Church, the women folk in the Church guide these new believers in the way of separation from the dress of men.

Now I know this is going to receive a ton of rejection, but so be it, we are the traditional IFB, and we believe in a separation of dress between the male and female.

 

[JonC]

As far as the women in our Church, you won't see any of the members wearing pants/slacks.

There are female visitors who come in wearing pants, and if they are saved and join the Church, the women folk in the Church guide these new believers in the way of separation from the dress of men.

Now I know this is going to receive a ton of rejection, but so be it, we are the traditional IFB, and we believe in a separation of dress between the male and female.

What about men wearing kilts?

 

[Charlie24]

What about men wearing kilts?

That's what a Scottish thing? I thought they only wore those things nowadays in traditional festivals and such.

Anyway, haven't seen any guys come to Church wearing that.

 

[JonC]

@Charlie24

I think that we can learn from the past with the "worship wars" of today and perhaps discern what the future may hold.

Our first "worship war" was in the 17th century with the invention of our traditional hymns.

Traditional hymns adopted the secular music (the type) of its time. This is related to the beat and meter of Classical music and, in particular, dance music like the waltz. It was culturely approachable for the day.

Prior to the invention of our traditional hymns worship music was singing metrical Psalms.
This controversy split churches. When a hymn was sung many would walk out. Hymns were considered common and worldly as opposed to divinely inspired psalms.


One one side we have men like Benjamin Keach and Hercules Collins, who fought for using hymns.

Worship needs to come from the people and be approachable, reflective of the music of that culture. Worship needs to be authentic rather than than aloof. It is not the music but the praises of people that makes worship sacred. Experience is vital to the life of the church (as opposed to psalms).

On the other side we have men like Isaac Marlow and William Kiffin, who rejected this "new cart" (as @Charlie24 would say).

Hymns were set to worldly music, using the popular timing, harmony, and style of the day as opposed to singing in meter. Hymns were reflective of the culture, hence by definition worldly. Hymns reflect the experiences and thoughts of men rather than the words of God.


In the end hymns prevailed and worship was changed forever.


There is a direct parallel between this first "worship war" and the current one.

 

[JonC]

That's what a Scottish thing? I thought they only wore those things nowadays in traditional festivals and such.

Anyway, haven't seen any guys come to Church wearing that.

They look comfortable. I am considering adopting a kilt. Seems....freeing.

 

[Charlie24]

They look comfortable. I am considering adopting a kilt. Seems....freeing.

Throw in the bagpipes and think you've found the answer.

 

[Charlie24]

@Charlie24

I think that we can learn from the past with the "worship wars" of today and perhaps discern what the future may hold.

Our first "worship war" was in the 17th century with the invention of our traditional hymns.

Traditional hymns adopted the secular music (the type) of its time. This is related to the beat and meter of Classical music and, in particular, dance music like the waltz. It was culturely approachable for the day.

Prior to the invention of our traditional hymns worship music was singing metrical Psalms.
This controversy split churches. When a hymn was sung many would walk out. Hymns were considered common and worldly as opposed to divinely inspired psalms.


One one side we have men like Benjamin Keach and Hercules Collins, who fought for using hymns.

Worship needs to come from the people and be approachable, reflective of the music of that culture. Worship needs to be authentic rather than than aloof. It is not the music but the praises of people that makes worship sacred. Experience is vital to the life of the church (as opposed to psalms).

On the other side we have men like Isaac Marlow and William Kiffin, who rejected this "new cart" (as @Charlie24 would say).

Hymns were set to worldly music, using the popular timing, harmony, and style of the day as opposed to singing in meter. Hymns were reflective of the culture, hence by definition worldly. Hymns reflect the experiences and thoughts of men rather than the words of God.


In the end hymns prevailed and worship was changed forever.


There is a direct parallel between this first "worship war" and the current one.

You know far more about music than me, Jon. All I know is that when I hear music that is not pleasing in spirit I can identify it immediately.

 

[JonC]

You know far more about music than me, Jon. All I know is that when I hear music that is not pleasing in spirit I can identify it immediately.

Not about music. About history.

At one type hymns were the "new cart" that the traditional Christians of the time viewed as allowing Satan into the church. They declared that God did not accept this worldly music. They viewed fighting against hymns as are fighting the good fight of faith to preserve it and give no ground to the end.

Then the end came and hymns became acceptable in worship.

Do you not at least see a similarity between that first "worship war" and the one we are speaking of today?

Those who fought so hard against hymns were absolutely convinced that introducing hymns into worship was Satan destroying the church, the church becoming the world.


Anyway, history is interesting. Very often it repeats itself. The "heros" of yesterday become the "villains" of today.

 

[JonC]

I remember and still have some of those old clip-on ties from the old days, never wear them just a memorabilia thing.

You're talking about the loose-nit IBF whereas I'm speaking of the traditional stand by the stuff IBF. There is a huge difference.

I noticed in one of your posts you mentioned you don't like anything around your neck, such as a tie. I have those same feelings, I just don't like it.

I usually wear a tie on Sunday morning service but not the evening service or Wed. night service. But I haven't been attending the Wed. night service for the past few months, can't drive with this vertigo attacking me at will and who knows when.

We don't have a dress code, there has never been one. As I have said before, our pastor believes in sound doctrine preaching and letting the individual come their own convictions.

Even in the old days when I was being raised up in the old IFB Church there was no dress code, but the pastor encouraged a suit and tie for service. He said when he was in school, BJU, his first suits were hand me downs and from the Good Will type places really cheap.

I do not know why it bothers me so much. I have to wear a lanyard at work (with two badges, a dosimeter, pens, permanent markers, radiation unit conversion chart). It is heavy. I prefer a collard shirt because it keeps the thing off my neck.

In the Army I hated wearing dog tags.

And when I wore ties I would do my best to cheat and keep that top button unbuttoned.

I was glad when business casual dropped the tie. I have a bunch of ties I pray never to wear.

Can't stand t-shirts when the neckline touches.

And do not get me started on those high neck sweaters my wife gives me for Christmas that I hide in the closet.