Classic Hymns VS CCM music in church

and preach, you cannot say that Shout to the Lord feeds the flesh. There's nothing lyrically to suggest that, and there's no "prescribed way" to play that song. So, either is fine...depending on what route you are headed in that particular time of worship.

To your question: I would refuse to choose all ccm or all classic. That's a bogus option, in my book.

For one, it's been said before...today's ccm may be tomorrow's classics. Many of Gaither's gospel songs (can anyone say "Because He Lives?") are now "classic hymns." But they're just old enough to acquire the "classic" moniker. What I'm saying is this: it's not always so easy to say that something is "CCM" or a "hymn." A great example: "How deep the Father's love for us." Hymn or CCM? The answer is yes.

Secondly, I refuse to put God in a box of temporality and tell Him to stay there. For one, we usually say "good old hymns" but we really mean "old-timey, maybe this century or last, but not TOO old." God can use stuff written in AD 100, 300 BC, or 2006. Let's use it all.

Preach, your Bible does say "Walk in the spirit." But to apply that to musical genres is making Scripture go further than it claims to itself. I can honestly say that we have never sung a song in any worship service I have led that has caused me to "fulfill the flesh's lusts."

 

i understand where you are coming from but it's all about being separated for the world. the bible says to be you separate and although shout to the Lord isn't necessarily bad it's about choosing between the good and best and always choosing the best. there's no debate that "nothing but the blood" is a classic hymn. but if you ask people what genre is "shout to the Lord" you would get a variety of answers. the same goes with "because he lives" some people would say it was a classic while others would still classify it as ccm. i'm not saying that all so-called ccm music is bad. you just have to be selective in what you listen to AND what you endorse for other people to listen to. the Bible says that we are not to be a stumblingblock to other people therefore we are to pick the best possible option with no shady areas

 

Worship is not about separation. Separation from the world is a component of our Christian walk. Worship is ascribing to God His ultimate worth.

Musicforyou, your position is summed up as,

"You must have unanimous approval of a musical item. Otherwise, it's wrong to use it."

Not scriptural.

If 9 out of 10 churches approve of "Because He Lives," is that good enough?

Not scriptural.

Your reasoning for "Shout to the Lord" being inferior (though it is dripping with scriptural lyrics--most of them straight quotes from the Psalms)...some folks can't classify it properly. Thus, a "shady area" exists and we can't use it in worship.

Not scriptural.

The Bible says not to cause others to stumble...it does NOT include the phrase following..."Therefore, we are to pick the best possible option with no shady areas.

Not scriptural.


Now, I should not be arrogant and shove my tastes down the throat of others. Avoiding that sin is called gentleness and humility. And I support any church who decides that they're sticking with the "old standards." But when that church or its people begin to tell me I'm sinning by not following their musical preferences, then I must speak out.

 

I had lunch with a fellow believer who goes to another church today...

Turns out we are both Sound techs, Love jesus and prefer Worship over Preaching...

WE agree that now that we've heard the Word and Believed, it's primarily our responsibility to feed ourselves...


I would guess that, depending upon the soil, a farmer will use different plow settings and methods to prepare the soil for planting?

If Judah means Praise...

Then consider the import of this verse...

Hosea 10:11 And Ephraim is as an heifer that is taught, and loveth to tread out the corn; but I passed over upon her fair neck: I will make Ephraim to ride; Judah shall plow, and Jacob shall break his clods.

The NIV says that "Judah *must* Plow".

We all know that if the ground isn't properly prepared you can sow seed until you're blue in the face and not get a useful harvest...

*IF* we can apply the concept of Praise and Worship as a preparation phase for the Sowing of the Seed of the Word of God...

And, *IF* we can allow that different soils require different plowing methodologies...

Then I submit that differing styles of Praise and Worship are acceptable...

One might even say that the harder and more rocky the ground the louder and harder the Rock needs to be to break up the fallow ground!

(Sorry couldn't resist...)

Also, for consideration...

Amos 9:11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:

Quoted here:

Acts 15:16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:

We are promised a Restoration of the Tabernacle of David in regards, specifically, to the New Gentile Church...

Three things of note about the Tabernacle of David...

1. It was erected where it could be seen.

2. It was most likely where the Psalms of David were sung

3. It was ushered in with unabashed Praise, exemplified by David's Dancing...

We know that David was not allowed to build the Temple. Solomon did that.

So, where did David Dance The Ark to?

The Tabernacle of David...

So, as gentiles what kind of Praise and Worship *should* we be building?

Formal Temple Style or Davidic Tabernacle Style?

Note: I am not saying a thing about style...

But, consider the Joyous Attitude and Freedom of the Heart over having God's Presence Restored...

Do we look forward to going to Sunday Service or is it drudgery, an onerous task that *has to* be performed?

Mike Sr.

 

If that is the choice, I'll refuse to choose.

So you answer and "clarify" by asking another question? My answer for which is fed would be different than yours. HOWEVER --> I say again... is worship about the songs YOU like, the tunes YOU like, the style YOU like? Or is it about what glorifies the Lord?

Nothing But the Blood is a song that teaches, a song that encourages the singer to re-examine the purpose and the finality of the blood. It's an element of systematic theology that is dreadfully needed. So many churches are not teaching these theological points, and so praise the Lord, we have songs like NBTB to sing and learn with. Shout to the Lord is a praise song, teaching such truth as "there is none beside the Lord... He is in a class by Himself." Both teach, both exhort and encourage, and both are used in our church's worship services.

I cannot correct you. Your Bible says that. Mine says this in continuation:

Maybe you can show me how Shout to the Lord is a work of the flesh?

"Good" and "best" are subjective, musicforyou. I know people that LOVE "Mansion Over the Hilltop," but I for one think it's a sorry song.

I agree and disagree. Do I want to do the "best" music, with the finest lyrics and the most teachable themes? Yes. Do I allow what people like or not like dictate what we sing? I try not to. I despise the song "Majesty." But we sing it... why? Because there are people in my church that are ministered to by that song. "Give Thanks" is another that I don't care for. Same thing... you'll find it in the bulletin several times a year.

The great issue is that we know alot of the classic hymns have stood the test of time. How? Because we're still singing them. This makes choosing great hymns less of a task for me. I know that I have several songs to use that are scriptural and musical on a variety of different topics.

The songs being written today don't have the benefit of being sifted through years of hymnals, church services, and revival meetings. That's why I have to pray, use discernment, and study the lyrics for each new song that comes along to distinguish the diamonds from the dirt. Do I use every "hot new song" that comes out? Nope. Some of them just don't make the cut, and those are the flashes in the pan that no one remembers next year. But then you find a jewel like "In Christ Alone" or even "Wonderful, Merciful Savior". These will stay for years and years. New songs, like the old ones, to be printed and reprinted in songbooks for generations.

 

Mister Rhodes,

Since your tastes might differ from mine,

I have no other choice but to condemn you to the pit for not liking everything I do, as much as I do.

You are a reprobate.

You probably own a tambourine. Heathern.

 

Well, if Mr Rhodes owns a Tabourine he's in good company! I own one, too!

I am sure my tastes differ, too... I hate Broccoli! Most wretched vegetable ever created!

 

I do own a tamborine.

But it's on loan to a charasmatic brother of mine.

BTW, I don't like broccoli either.

 

I would choose Hymns, but I'm not givin' up my



or my

 

I have to admit, I am more comfortable with classic hymns than I am with the more modern Christian worship music, but the hymns are what I grew up on. I am not close-minded about it - I am sure that when some of the hymns were new people didn't like or approve of them. Times change, and if a modern Christian song can touch someone's heart and either bring them closer to Him, soothe them in a time of pain or fill them with joy - who am I to say that it isn't acceptable?

A friend of mine who invited me to visit his church said that they use modern worship songs. I said, "Well I won't know any of the words." He said "That's ok, we put the words up on a screen."
That made me feel better.

There is no need to make a choice.

 

Tambourines...

I'll stick with the stringed instruments...

 

Interesting thread. Since I am struggling with this very question, I thought I'd put some thoughts down.

There is a praise band in a church I have attended that is indestinguishable from any rock band. And the extent to which they will mix old and new is you may on a special occasion, get 1 verse of a hymn like "Christ the Lord is Risen Today" (that was Easter Sunday) then they cut it short and go right into their brand of worship. Complete with a guitarist that is hopping around the stage like any guitarist you see at any rock concert. If no applause, the worship leader asks for applause for our great God (seems rather cheap to me, as it strikes me he is looking for applause for them as it comes at the end of their "set".

It is loud, raucous, and does very little in my view to honor God. It was asked earlier in this thread what the difference is between the message of a hymn like "Nothing but the Blood" and a song like "Shout to the Lord". Look at the attitude conveyed in the words. We are to be humble before our God. The music should prepare you to listen and receive the word. There is a place for both, but for a Sunday morning worship service, I like a little depth to my worship.

The songs the band in the church I reference above are all about God's love. You might get an allusion to His righteousness. It is never contrasted with our sinfulness. No word of the wrath of God, or of what we are saved from. There is no clear doctrine explored to the depths of it. Would any modern song refer to the singer as a "worm".

I also think that the bible is clear when it says we are in the world but not of it. Their is supposed to be a different culture in a church community than out in the world. Yet we seem to be trying to make our church services indistinguishable from popular culture!

This is my perspective, I realize, but I think these are issues that need to be looked at. Older hymns can reinforce a sermon because they convey doctrine in the lyrics. Look at the words to "And Can it Be", "Rock of Ages", and "Christ the Lord is Risen Today", contrast those words with what you get in the praise choruses that are so popular. I think that throwing these away adversely affects the impact of the service on the people in the congregation.

 

I went to college as a music major.

In music history, we learned that every time music changed its "style", it was fought against. Gregorian chant for example, was considered pure. Singing two lines of differently noted music, as in a soprano part and a tenor part, at the same time was considered (a quote I remember from the professor) as satanic. The style of Mozart from Bach was a struggle. Dvorak was not liked at first. And then the 1920's...the 50's...see the picture?

Perhaps what we are experiencing here is just the repetiveness of history. We are all going to have our own opinion. But I think an honest praise to the Lord is sweet to his ears, no matter what instrument is accompanying it.

 

This is a valid concern, but we mmust tremember, that this "different culture" should not simply be "popular culture of 100-300 years ago". There must be moderation; not being limited to only one period, or another, as if just the time by itself makes it "worldly" or "sacred".

 

If a church is *really* Worshipping God "acceptably" it will not, can not, be mistaken for the world's culture...

In my view "Seeker Sensitive" has given both CCM Praise & Worship and Christianty in general a bad name as regards to being separate.

If a church is *really* Lifting Jesus up then all men will be drawn to Him...

Psalms 22:3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.

Galatians 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

If all believers are part of the Israel of God then His presence will be evident when we Praise Him...

In my view it's not the style but the heart that is the seat of Praise and Worship...

The style merely provides an ambience that encourages Praise and Worship...

So, irregardless of the style of music the message of a church that is truly Praising and Worshipping from their hearts will have the Presence of God and that Presence will convict of sins and draw the lost to Jesus...

If I am making any sense at all??

In too many churches we have more "Consumers of Religious Product" than "Communers with God". (As Greg Laurie alludes in "The Upside Down Church")

I don't see how a person can truly Worship and not be changed...

Anyone can acknowledge the goodness of God and Praise Him...

But, to really Worship requires a changed heart...

If our Praise does not progress to Worship from our hearts then we will fail to be different from the world where it really matters...

In our hearts...

BTW: If my guitar player starting "showboating" during Praise and Worship...

At the least he'd have to sit out for a few weeks...

There is only one to whom we gathet to draw Glory to...

And, as much as I like electric guitar it ain't the guitar player, it' supposed to be Jesus...

That's not to say that an instrumentalist won't get a heart-felt solo from time to time...

But, one of the purposes of a Praise Team is to be a **TEAM**... Duh!

Mike Sr.

 

Well, that mp3 I mentioned on last page has been downloaded 4 times but no comments here yet so I'll add my 2¢ worth

Unfailing Love was written by Geoff Bullock in mid-90s. I had no problem recommending to mum that we use the song that afternoon, and she had no problem agreeing to use it.

There is a lot of dross out there in new songs - ranging from the "Jesus is my boyfriend" stuff (best described by the line from The Simpsons They switched from Christian music to regular pop. All you do is switch "Jesus" to "baby"), through to my pet hate "I Love My Cat" songs (could have been written about the writer's cat for all anyone knows) - there is a diamond or two to find in the dirt though

 

I wish I could have gotten to this a lot sooner. To reply to all the points would take a long time and make an interminable post. So let me make a general reply that will respond to the basic premises of most of the points made in this thread.

One cannot understand musics to think that the absence of a music theory chapter in the Bible means that God's okay with all styles. Music is the communication of feeling, mood, demeanor, etc. That's what it's for, and that's why people listen to it. Some people enjoy excess and riot, so they will enjoy music that is riotous.

But the Bible says that God has forbidden excess and riot. So taking our cues from the Scripture, we can rule out all riotous forms of music as compatible with Christian character. (That's just one example. I'll leave it there because I'm trying to make this post as short as possible.)

Now worship.

Jesus said plainly that true worshippers will worship the Father in truth and in spirit, and in saying so gave us the defining points of true worship, it's object and its manner. The object most folks are agreed upon, the Father; but the manner is the topic of our debate. It's important to note that Christ here was contrasting the manner (and nature) of OT worship with NT worship. So that automatically neutralizes the appeals to David and Miriam. The manner of worship "winked at" by God under the darkness and superstition of the OT has been folded up and put away. God never was pleased or appeased by the the blood of goats and bulls, or other carnal modes of worship. (The ceremonial laws are called "carnal commandments." Heb. 7:16)

Christ also revealed that God has a will concerning the manner in which we approach Him. That neutralizes all God-leaves-it-up-to-us-and-our-personal-preference arguments..

The CCM argument boils down to self will. Those who argue for "classic hymns" are arguing for God's preferences, even if many of their arguments are erroneous. None of them say or feel that "classic hymns" should be used because they prefer them, despite false accusations to the contrary. They are saying, "This is what pleases God."

The CCM group is saying, "This is what pleases me."

 

Hogwash.

 

Your argument is that God has no will concerning the style of music in church, because you can't find a verse specifying musical elements.

If God has no will concerning music, then whose will is left?