Church music

So what do you think is appropriate music for church?

More questions:
Do you listen to the same stuff at home or in the car?
Do you think one type of music in church is appropriate while another is not?
How do you decide what to use?

Of course I have my own agenda I'm trying to push but we'll talk about that later.


Trevor

TJ...I'll jump in first (at my own peril...LOL!) I think I know where you're headed from reading some of your other posts. No doubt when my name posts as the reply person you'll know where I'm coming from in my answers. I don't think you and I are "on the same sheet of music." Nevertheless, here we go.....

First, you cannot set a list of OK music or styles that covers all churches. That is humanly impossible, impractical and wrong from the point-of-view that each local, independent Baptist church is autonomous.

Second, the Bible does not specifically address music styles...everything you read and hear on this matter in today's Christian circles is derived from outlying principles. For example, churches that don't use CCM invoke the separation from worldliness verses (II Cor. 6:14-7:1; Romans 12:1,2; I John 2:15-17). Churches that use CCM invoke the celebrative verses from the Psalms to put forth their point-of-view. There are no direct verses on musical style in the scriptures. That is NOT to say that you can't establish guidelines and principles for your church. You can. But these guidelines must primarily be for your church only and not crammed down another church's throat. They must also be recognized as being derived from verses/principles outside the direct realm of scripture specifically addressing music.

Third, we must consider the culture of where we live. I am in western PA. We may not do musically what someone in the south might do. That's fine. You meet your people where they are as governed by what you believe is acceptable Christian music for your church and personal beliefs.

Fourth, you learn to agree to disagree and maintain a respectful Christian spirit. You follow what the Pastor and Minister of Music (if there is one) has laid out for your church music program. You go to them privately if you disagree and attempt to resolve the matter in a peaceful, Christ-honoring fashion. If it can't be resolved you find a church ministry that you can support and in which you can serve. You leave peacefully without rancor.

Only in cases of severe contemporary musical styles do you raise your voice in a more open manner (eg. perhaps using acid Christian rock in a church service). Even there you have to be careful HOW you go about "raising your voice of concern."

Trevor, this is just a starting point for this thread. This should be interesting, to say the least. Let's see what happens...kind regards---Daniel

Some of my best friends live in Western PA!

Music is a good indicator of the beliefs of a particular Baptist Church...don't you think?

The strictest music program in existence is at my old IFB church.... my new church is quite a bit more liberal but respectful in music , always considering All the congregation, their age and their tastes...there's a little bit of something for everyone. As long as the spirit of the music is biblical and honoring God and Christ....I think that is most important, don't you?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daniel:
First, you cannot set a list of OK music or styles that covers all churches. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep - that's right, we can't make black and white definitions of what is right and wrong on this issue simple because what is right or wrong in art is dependent on the present culture which and that culture is always changing (it's like solving a differential equation - but not really)

I do think that it's important to search out principles for worship that are consistent with our view of God - I think this makes perfect sense.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Second, the Bible does not specifically address music styles... everything you read and hear on this matter in today's Christian circles is derived from outlying principles. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep - you're right again. That's my point exactly.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>That is NOT to say that you can't establish guidelines and principles for your church. You can. But these guidelines must primarily be for your church only and not crammed down another church's throat. They must also be recognized as being derived from verses/principles outside the direct realm of scripture specifically addressing music.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree again.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Third, we must consider the culture of where we live. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I think you are right again. I wouldn't expect an church in Africa to worship in the same way we do. Yet the principles of worship would still apply.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Fourth, you learn to agree to disagree and maintain a respectful Christian spirit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I could not agree more.


Alright, now we are getting somewhere! Our principles for choosing appropriate music is what we need to discuss next. It's seems that we agree on so many things already but surely there must be somewhere that we differ.
Here are a few principles that I just dreamed up - tell me if you agree or not or what.
1) Church worship is for the congregation to bring them to a place of worship.

2) Church worship should be ordered

3) Church worship is to prepare you for the sermon.

4) Church worship should always be reverent.

5) Church worship should be mentally stimulating as well as physically or emotionally stimulating.


I just made those up - I don't agree with all of them - but I would like to know what you (or anybody else) thinks about them

Trevor

[ December 06, 2001: Message edited by: TJAcorn ]

Hey, Free...where do your friends live in Western PA? You can privately e-mail if you wish. You can access my e-mail from my profile.
--------------------------------------------
Trevor: I agree with all five of your church music principles. My only caution involves #2 about ordered worship. We must not regulate the Holy Spirit out of our worship services. This is VERY possible. Most Baptist churches are as liturgical as any Catholic church. We had a deacon one time say that he could go asleep in a service, wake up, look at his watch and know EXACTLY where we were in our church services....needless to say, we've made major changes to correct this problem...I'm saying, be careful to allow for reasonable sponteneity...and, no, I'm not advocating an out-of-control, free-for-all type of service either....I Cor. 14:40 is still in the Bible. God does want us to worship "decently and in order."

I have no concerns with your other four points...now, does anyone else have more points to add to Trevor's? Let's keep this civil discussion going. We hope to show that this thread can explore the topic without getting rancorous or mean-spirited. Please help us fulfill this wish...many thanks!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>1) Church worship is for the congregation to bring them to a place of worship. 2) Church worship should be ordered. 3) Church worship is to prepare you for the sermon. 4) Church worship should always be reverent. 5) Church worship should be mentally stimulating as well as physically or emotionally.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I agree with points 1, 4, & 5, depending on the construction placed upon them. If number two means there should be some general framework in which to operate, I can agree with it. If it means the same old same old Sunday after Sunday, I don't agree. I attend churches that, for example, might vote to have two sermons instead of one if a visiting minister is present. Though I'm not in favor of a "free-for-all", I think that, even with the restrictions advised by Paul in I Cor. 14, the Corinthian services were "wild" compared to the stiff Baptist formalities observed in many modern Baptist churches. I think number three severely limits the nature and intent of worship. Worship is much more than just preparing for the sermon. Prayer and singing are independent worship acts, not requiring the presence of a sermon to establish their validity. I do think the sermon is usually the central element in a service, but do not agree with an idea that has somewhat prevailed here among fundamental and conservative type Baptists - that you can't gather for a service without the preacher at least giving some talk or devotional during it.

For the record, since I haven't been to this forum in a while; I don't personally like CCM, but I agree with Daniel:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>There are no direct verses on musical style in the scriptures.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think we put way too much emphesis on "what" kind of music is right or wrong for worship. Tell me something, if you think it's ok to listen to CCM or any christian rock outside of the church building then why would it be wrong to praise with it on the inside? Isn't that a double standard?

karen

D. in the greater, lovely areas of Pittsburgh, PA...Squirel Hill and Carnegie...

Red...No, there is no double standard if you carefully study scripture regarding music and worship. God had a form of music (and even musical instruments) that He did not want in the sanctuary for what is often called corporate worship. (This topic has been extensively vented in this board.)For civil celebrations (outside the sanctuary proper) these same instruments and musical forms were OK. It is no double standard to have two different "playlists." Please read my first post in this thread about knowing your people (cultural) and how to treat them as a corporate whole. Keep the ?'s coming....we're doing great thus far! Hallelujah!
------
rl...I see where you're coming from in your post...as I said in one of my posts on this thread, we Baptists are way too liturgical!

[ December 07, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

Well, Daniel, it appears that you have crossed over, and though there is no personal animosity on my part, I feel that I must cross swords with you now.

Does the Bible specifically address the style of dress? At what point does nakedness become wrong? Should we use cultural norms as a base for our dress codes?

And yet you say that is how we should create "our" guidelines. In short you're saying man is the boss and that there is no right and wrong in this issue.

Aaron...I would not characterize my comments as "crossing over." I was never honestly aligned with either side in the strictest sense. I have evolved (forgive the word) into my current model of thought and philosophy slowly over the 19 years I have been a full-time Minister of Music. I would characterize my position on music as "reasonable balance." We should not go for just any type of CCM, but we should also avoid blanketly ruling it all out. Decisions would be made on a song-by-song basis. Doctrine is the first thing to check. Then I would listen to the "accompaniment vehicle" and see if it obscured the clarity of the vocal message. If it doesn't obfuscate the message then we should possibly allow it to be used in our churches. My cultural comments were more a stylistic nomenclature than a blanket endorsement of musical compromise. If I had to declare a musical position, I would be more aligned with the traditional/conservative model. It's just that after 19 years of this on a full-time basis I have come to see that the Bible is more general than specific on music. Many fundamentalists have made fools of themselves by promoting extra-Biblical music standards and teaching. I used to do this very thing until God got a hold of my heart and showed the error of my ways. I meant well, but I was definitely going about my teaching in the wrong way.

All of this background is a long way of answering your question, both about dress and music. The Bible teaches modesty and gender differentiation in the area of dress. In music the Bible emphasizes praise and worship of God, Spirit-filled singing and admonitional music. No verses deal directly with the beat, the style, etc. I admit you can infer principles from other passages/teachings of the Word of God, but not dogmatic musical doctrine as some have tried to promulgate. That's why I have posted in the fashion you have seen on this particular thread.

Please keep the dialogue going, Aaron. I am not afraid of dealing with/answering any question you may wish to ask. The only area I can't adequately go into are the scientific areas I have seen in many of your posts. I have not sufficiently studied those areas to answer honestly and correctly. I'm sorry for that deficiency, brother.

When we all get to heaven, what will REALLY matter? Hmmmmm......

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Daniel said:
We should not go for just any type of CCM, but we should also avoid blanketly ruling it all out. Decisions would be made on a song-by-song basis. Doctrine is the first thing to check. Then I would listen to the "accompaniment vehicle" and see if it obscured the clarity of the vocal message. If it doesn't obfuscate the message then we should possibly allow it to be used in our churches.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I or others on this side of the debate say "CCM" we are using the term commonly employed to describe Christian themes (however nebulous) set to rock music (however "soft"). That is how it is used by folks on the other side of the debate EXCEPT when they are debating the issue. Then the definition is changed to mean merely music written today. Let's keep the definitions consistent.

You should add one more criterion to your list, and that is the lifestyle and testimony of the performer. In entertainment it is irrelevant, but to use even the "good" songs of unfit ministers profanes the office. God is not as concerned with the work as He is with the testimony of the life of the minister.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Daniel said:
My cultural comments were more a stylistic nomenclature than a blanket endorsement of musical compromise. If I had to declare a musical position, I would be more aligned with the traditional/conservative model. It's just that after 19 years of this on a full-time basis I have come to see that the Bible is more general than specific on music.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In 19 years you must realize that every piece of music has character, and the Bible is very specific on character. In this century we have closed our eyes to this very real, non-optional principle. It is only in this century that anyone ever dared to declare that music is neutral though evidence to the contrary is abundant and at hand.

I will say, though, and you will agree, that some degree of maturity and discernment is necessary to make the proper judgements in many issues. (One of the reasons, by the way, a minister is not to be a novice.) My nine-year-old doesn't see the harm in rock music. Or even in acid rock as you mentioned above.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Daniel said:
Many fundamentalists have made fools of themselves by promoting extra-Biblical music standards and teaching. I used to do this very thing until God got a hold of my heart and showed the error of my ways. I meant well, but I was definitely going about my teaching in the wrong way.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's say that you are considering John Doe as a pastoral candidate. Yet the Bible says nothing about the life of John Doe, there are only Biblical principles about how his life should be.

Where do you go to find out if John Doe meets the qualifications. You probably do credit and background checks, and you ask people who have known him.

All these sources are extra-biblical. But you find the information on John Doe, then apply Biblical standards. And I suspect those you accuse of going to extra-biblical sources do not do so to create a standard of right and wrong, but to find information which to apply Biblical standards.

You don't find anything in the Scriptures about Marijuana, yet you may be the first to cite a Newsweek report about the affects of Marijuana to make your case.

That is all we do. When we go to extra-Biblical sources it is to find information about the affects of certain styles. Not because we haven't discerned the good or evil with our spirits, but because we are forced to go to these sources to prove that the effects we have discerned are universal and not a mere product of personal preference or cultural conditioning.

Also, whether we look foolish or not is not the issue. The last thing we should covet is the approbation of men. And it doesn't matter what kind of evidence you have, the world and worldly Christians mock men who preach holiness.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Bible teaches modesty and gender differentiation in the area of dress. In music the Bible emphasizes praise and worship of God, Spirit-filled singing and admonitional music. No verses deal directly with the beat, the style, etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But where is the standard of modesty derived? The culture, or from the plain teaching of the Word of God?

And in music, the Scriptures say plainly to make "melody": Isaiah 23:16, 51:3; Eph. 5:19. In all our music making, the melody should be preeminent, and all harmony, rhythm, and accompaniament should be in support of the melody. (The rock beat is completely opposite this guiding principle.)

Still, in the NT, music is de-emphasized, and it's primary place is not "praise and worship", but in teaching and admonishing one another (Col. 3:16) and encouraging one another (Eph. 5:19).

Nowhere do you find provision in the NT for a "music minister."

[ December 08, 2001: Message edited by: Aaron ]

AARON...I've just finished a two and a half hour choir rehearsal, so my brain is a little pickled. I cannot adequately answer your points. You and I have to do a good job at this since we are being "watched" by many out their in cyberland.(I can imagine Eric B, Ransom, Smoke Eater, etc. are LOL big time at the two of us engaged in a duel instead of you with them! )I will get back to you when I can, brother. I still feel that you're "out on a limb." I know you are persuaded about what you believe. So am I, but we will deal with that later....

aaron, I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head as to what I believe and that is that "there is no right or wrong on this issue". Now I know you don't agree with that but that's my position. Daniel, I disagree..I don't believe the bible condemns any music being used in the church.

karen

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron:


When I or others on this side of the debate say "CCM" we are using the term commonly employed to describe Christian themes (however nebulous) set to rock music (however "soft"). That is how it is used by folks on the other side of the debate EXCEPT when they are debating the issue. Then the definition is changed to mean merely music written today. Let's keep the definitions consistent.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe we are keeping the definitions consistent.

But if it helps, here is my definition of CCM:
A cheap rip-off 6 month late copy of whatever the world has to offer. Artificial.
At least that's how I view MOST of it but not all. I would agree with you that the term CCM is commonly employed to "describe Christian themes (however nebulous) set to rock music (however "soft")".


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> God is not as concerned with the work as He is with the testimony of the life of the minister.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand your point but I don't agree completely. Firstly, we are not dealing with a preacher or Pastor who is actively in a position of teaching. CCM artists produce music which should be analyzed and criticized. Their personal lives are removed from ours and we cannot accurately analyze their "testimony". I love Caedmon's Call and from what I can tell they have a great testimony to others but I don't know them personally so I don't know for sure - I can only look at their music and listen to "hear say".
Martin Luther did some horrendous things but that does not mean that I won't sing "A Mighty Fortress". I could say similar things about allot of people that we respect - Like Calvin or Edwards.
So what's my point? God is concerned about the testimony of His children in the music biz but He can use what they write for His glory even if their testimony is not the best.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> In 19 years you must realize that every piece of music has character, and the Bible is very specific on character. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is an illogical statement. Just because every piece of music has character does not mean that the Bible is very specific about THIS TYPE of character. The Bible is very specific about OUR character but not necessarily about the character attributed to music.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> In this century we have closed our eyes to this very real, non-optional principle.It is only in this century that anyone ever dared to declare that music is neutral though evidence to the contrary is abundant and at hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is only in this century that anyone considered a style of music to be "Worldly". In the past there were only two distinctions made. There was Sacred music and there was Secular(non Sacred) music. However, this did not mean that Christian did not listen to Secular music - far from it! they produced it themselves! No, the difference is that Sacred music was only for use in Church - they considered their offerings to God in the form of music as a very important thing. Secular music was for their own enjoyment.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> It is only in this century that anyone ever dared to declare that music is neutral though evidence to the contrary is abundant and at hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Music is neutral and there is not an abundant amount of evidence contrary to that. Music is Art, it is not right or wrong in itself. However, music appeals immediately to our emotions and can have a very powerful affect on us (like in a movie). This not wrong in itself but it can be used in an inappropriate manner.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Let's say that you are considering John Doe as a pastoral candidate. Yet the Bible says nothing about the life of John Doe, there are only Biblical principles about how his life should be.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, but bad example. For pastors we a given very specific things to check into (I Tim. 5) however with music we are not. We can only judge "the feel" of music and decide if it should be used or not.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> But where is the standard of modesty derived? The culture, or from the plain teaching of the Word of God?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From both. In some places it is considered immodest for a girl to show her ear. Does this mean that it is sin for her to uncover her ear in public? absolutely! The Bible doesn't say that it is but considering the people and their history we must agree that for them it is sin.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And in music, the Scriptures say plainly to make "melody": Isaiah 23:16, 51:3; Eph. 5:19. In all our music making, the melody should be preeminent, and all harmony, rhythm, and accompaniment should be in support of the melody. (The rock beat is completely opposite this guiding principle.)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Isaiah 23:16 is talking about a harlot singing to be remembered in Tyre.
Isaiah 51:2 is talking about the Lord comforting Zion
Eph. 5:19 claims that we should be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms, spiritual songs, and hymns, making melody with our hearts to the Lord.

I don't see how this "plainly teaches" that the melody should be preeminent. Although I don't entirely disagree I just don't like how you have chosen to prove this. Good rock songs have good melody - it's what makes them so popular - they have a catchy, easy to digest, melody. It is not a steak dinner, instead it is more like a twinkie, but that doesn't mean it's bad. It's just not something you want to live on.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Still, in the NT, music is de-emphasized, and it's primary place is not "praise and worship", but in teaching and admonishing one another (Col. 3:16) and encouraging one another (Eph. 5:19).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think that both of those verses apply to our personal relationships with other Christians, not to corporate worship. I don't think that you can logically conclude from these verses that music's "primary place is not praise and worship but in teaching and admonishing one another and encouraging one another".
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Nowhere do you find provision in the NT for a "music minister." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Or for a single "Pastor" either. Elders or Overseers, yes, but not a single all powerful pastor.


This was not meant to be a "CCM is bad" discussion and I hate the fact that you are diverting it into that. I am not advocating that we should use CCM in our worship services, but I am advocating that we should have special music set aside only for use in worshiping God in a corporate manner. Yet, just because I think that that "is the ideal" I don't think it is wrong for people to use CCM in worship if they so wish. I just feel that I want to give God more than the pop culture.

Trevor

Earlier I posted the following "principles of worship" and I said that I didn't agree with them all. Well, here is how I disagree.

1) Church worship is for the congregation to bring them to a place of worship.


I disagree, I think that corporate worship is our offering to God for God. It is not for our own benefit - yet it does benefit us and it should take us to a place of worship - both mentally, physically, and emotionally.

2) Church worship should be ordered

I agree but that does not mean that it must be the same every week. I just think that lots of thought and energy should be involved and the best of our talents and knowledge used to create an environment that is reverent, glorifies God, and is made up of music that is of higher quality.

3) Church worship is to prepare you for the sermon.

I disagree - who ever said that we have to have a sermon everytime we meet together? I don't think it is wrong to have a similar "theme" between the music and the sermon - but it is not necessary. I also think that worship through music should be the primary part of a service. The teaching should be done in Sunday school, in small group Bible studies, and in discipleship methods.

4) Church worship should always be reverent.

I agree, however I think we live unbalanced if we never experience corporate celebration. Sadly, most people never consider this.

5) Church worship should be mentally stimulating as well as physically or emotionally stimulating.

I agree - but I don't that it needs to be that way all the time. Some times we will worship out of fear and awe, and at other times we will worship out of love and joy.

Here are some other principles to consider:

1)Church music should never include drums or electric guitars

2)Church music should appeal to unbelievers

3) We should have different music for each age group

4)We should shun all rock, jazz, and country influences on our Church music.

5)We should choose a style for Church music and stick with it and it alone

Aaron, this is my fulfilled promise of December 8. It's taken a long time to get back to you because of Christmas programs, cantatas, etc. You know the drill!

As much as I would love to jump up and down and say AMEN to your post of December 8 (#769), I can't. Oh, I agree with you about the character of a piece of music. I agree with the idea of the singer/writers testimony. I just can't see how we can be GLOBALLY DOGMATIC on these points for all peoples and all cultures. I would love to be able to be GLOBALLY DOGMATIC, but I can't. Just as the KJV can't be the world's Bible, certain music beliefs can't be all church's beliefs. That's my point. I am not saying open the door of our independent, fundamental Baptist churches to any ole music, but rather BE CONSISTENT IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOGMATIC.

Will any of this change your way of thinking? No. All of us at BB know better. But maybe I will have articulated a thought in this post that will generate reasonable debate and discussion. Free free to go after me if you wish. I am still far more conservative than you may think. There are no drums, bands, etc. in our church. I just want to get people to think about BEING CONSISTENT BEFORE BEING DOGMATIC. We all far miserably short of this goal, but it's worth a try.

Uh, oh...I'm in for it....

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TJAcorn:
(SNIP)

Here are some other principles to consider:

1)Church music should never include drums or electric guitars

2)Church music should appeal to unbelievers

3) We should have different music for each age group

4)We should shun all rock, jazz, and country influences on our Church music.

5)We should choose a style for Church music and stick with it and it alone[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Hard to make a hard-and-fast rule on this. Does the prohibition on guitars apply to a bass in the orchestra? Does it apply only to electric guitars? "Silent Night" was originally played on the acoustic guitar.

2. It's nice when it happens, but it shouldn't be required. Sometimes worship music should be for the church solely as an act of worship; appeal to unbelievers iad an added benefit, not the prime purpose.

3. It's hard to have different music for each "group," especially in small churches. Does this mean split services, or using several styles at one service?

4. How do you root out all rock, jazz and country influences? Does this mean Southern Gospel music is not allowed? In many places in the South, it would be impossible to root out that tradition and still have music. (Just ask my honky-tonk pianist at the rural church I attended." Is traditional African-American Gospel music allowed, even though
it's recognized as one of the roots of jazz.

5. Depends on what "style" means. Just traditional hymns? Or only praise music. Seems there should be some variety of music, with the variety reflecting the attitude of each particular service or the effect the music is to have.

All Right - I've been gone for a while and I'd forgotten all about this discussion.

I'm going to forget all this "beating around the bush" trying to get you all to think yourselves into the principles I believe.

Here is what I believe:
Concerning corporate worship - not personal worship:
1) Since church should be a congregation of BELIEVERS we should not worry ourselves about getting people saved during the worship time - it is a time where the child adores his Father. Salvation is an issue that should be dealt with outside of church (church being the gathering of ourselves (believers) together for worship and teaching).

2) Church music should be distinct from candy music (rock, country, pop, dance, swing, southern gospel, and other easily digestible music styles) - It should have substance both musically and doctrinally.

3) It should be reverent

4) The music is useless if it is not understood. Therefore, the songs sung must be explained.

5) The music should be prepared ahead of time and practiced - it is, in a sense, our offering to God.


Tell me if you agree.

Is there anything that you would add or take away?

Trevor

I would agree with nearly everything but the part aboutbeing concerned about being getting saved in our church services. Let's be careful to remember why we're left on this earth--to preach the gospel (good news) to every creature. What's one of the best venues?---THE BIBLE-BELIEVING WORSHIP SERVICE!

Your other musical points are fine...thanks for the clear, straighforward post!