Contemporary vs Traditional Services

God forbid, Jeremiah's cry to return to God is just as valid today as it was then. My point was his cry was to return from their evil ways and to God which means repent, forgive etc... and has nothing to do with how you worship.

I don't believe any of us know music from when David worshipped though we do have the words to many of his songs. Don't forget the songs of accent and songs for decent etc... I agree with Riogers questions, how do you pick one era of music and say this is the only holy way to worship? Worship has happened through time and will continue until the end of time so will change with time. Spirit and in truth is the only biblical requirement. You can add to that what you want.

 

Great points all, Pastor Tom. We have two services & they are very different -- moreso than perhaps the norm in Baptist circles since the first one is a traditional, liturgical one.

You really have to work to offset the "two church" syndrome. Our traditional service starts at 9:15 and the more contemporary starts at 11. There is a full 45 minute break between the two services, with coffee, bagels, donuts, etc. so that those coming in and those going out can fellowship together. Once a month, we have a "big breakfast" that really encourages this interaction. Also, this 45 minutes allows changes (if necessary) to the sanctuary. And yes, the same sermon is heard at both.

 

hmm. i like both traditional and contemporary.

i love the blended though - blending hymns with contemporary music and vice versa.

as for sitting and standing... i have observed many a church service where the worship leader doesn't say "stand up for this next song" - yet someone will stand up (it's inevitable) - BUT - here's the thing...

say a person in the middle pew stands up - more than likely alot of people behind that person will stand up afterwards - then eventually the people in front of the first person standing - will stand up..

it's a whole "follow the leader" deal. haha. least from what i've seen.

i love services where everyone is free to stand up - or sit down - kneel - dance etc. it's alot more open that way. more personal i think.

God bless

 

So the flute, peye-ano. lyre, saxophone, guitar, chimes, timbrel - none of those belong in worship???

 

If you are using them to play music that appeals to the flesh instead of the spirit, they have no place in the sanctuary.

 

But who decides that sfiC? Who decides whether its your spirit or flesh? Do I get to decide that for you? Do you decide for me?

 

Like microphones, chairs, carpet, wool suits, and paper money? You can't use that logic to justify/condemn anything...

 

:laugh:
Yeah, true Christians should be standing nude in an open field, as the world wears clothes and meets in buildings, too.

 

Not standing, and not in a field, but other than that, you've got the idea.

 

OK, so obviously, if that which is being played is pushing you towards carnal behavior, OK....but we have to be careful. What if, in listening to the music, you tap your toe, or clap? You're enjoying the music. Does that make it "appeal to the flesh?" The definitions get a bit knotty....

Not to mention the whole problem of who gets to define the terms "worldly" and "fleshly." Those definitions at one time included the piano, organ, guitar, polyphonic (part) singing, etc.

A deacon in a church I was in years ago asked a young black girl to leave. Why? Because she was close friends with a guy there, and relationships between a black girl and white guy were, in that person's words, "worldly."

I couldn't help it. I shot the deacon. But only in the leg. (I was justified. 1 Hesitations 3:27 says, "Idiot, racist deacons who play the 'worldly' card to justify bigotry are to be shot in the leg. Verily, verily.") (BTW....if you don't understand sarcasm, step away from the computer at this point)

Point: Our definitions don't count. God's does.

 

rbell, you rock! :laugh:

 

You were no doubt inspired by that wonderful old-time hymn "I Shot the Sheriff", playing in the background

 

I recognize that my musical preferences are as much cultural as anything else. I grew up on the hymns only stuff, pretty traditional services. As a minister of music, my choices for the choir to sing reflected my tastes. I did, however, become a bit more tolerant of CCM when a particular song or chorus struck my fancy. So I suppose I could live with a blended service, but I don't expect my aging church members to demand it any time soon.

In looking back, I remember that we always stood on the opening hymn and prayer, sat for the next one, and stood for the offering hymn. We also stood for the invitation hymn.

All it took to modify this ritual was for somebody to ask, "Why do we do it that way." When the only answer anybody could come up with is that we'd always done it that way, we quickly ditched the standing everywhere but the invitation.

So that leads to my question for CCM folks--if the congregation stands for the first four songs or choruses, why? Is there a good reason for it at all? I hope you have better answers than I did when the question was asked.

In other words, what is the rationale for when you stand and sit?

 

I don't ask them to stand or sit... I tell them each week at the beginning of the service to maintain the posture that allows them to express themselves. For some that's sitting. Others have bowed at their pew during worship. Others clap while standing, or sitting. It's not my job to interpret how the Spirit wants them to express themselves.

 

Bingo.....

 

I agree partly, SFIC. I don't believe that an organ is particularly "holy", or that a guitar is particularly sinful. But because people have different "tastes" in music, some may find certain traditional hymn tunes "appealing", even apart from the words with which they are usually associated. I suppose what I am trying to say (in my usual bumbling way ) is that I would insert the word "only" before "to the flesh".

 

A couple years ago, I visited a church called North Coast Church in California that had what I thought had a creative solution to this common problem of different worship preferences.

Their motto was "One Church, Many Locations". They had several different services worshiping at the same time each with a different worship style. "Traditions" had a blend of hymns and contemporary music. "Video Cafe" had a casual coffeehouse atmosphere. "The Edge" felt like a heavy metal rock concert. And there were others. After the worship time, all the services watched the same sermon broadcast over live video feed.

The friend I was visiting attended "The Edge" and I had a hard time worshipping in that atmosphere, but I can see how it would be worshipful for others. But I was amazed to see that it wasn't just folks under 25 but there were also many folks above 40 there as well.

When the sermon came around, I was expecting a wishy-washy megachurch type sermon but was really impressed that they were going through a book study on 1 Timothy and really digging into the nitty gritty of it. What impressed me most in the sermon was the very efficient use of time.

I find that typically preachers spend 95% of the sermon reading the text, setting up arguments and interpreting the text and maybe leave 5% on application at the end. This pastor did a great job of reading, setting of arguments, sharing historical context and interpreting the text in maybe 25% of the time. I think he spent over 75% of the time suggesting very real and practical applications for all demographics of the congregation. The applications were all directly related to the passage and here I was thinking that this was a really difficult passage to relate to modern audiences.

I guess I got a little sidetracked, but what I'm trying to suggest is that there are creative solutions to the problem of different worships style preferences that still preserve a unified church atmosphere with good teaching. Most do not have the finances to do what North Coast Church does, but with some creativity, a solution can usually be found.

 

We do 2 different kinds of services because there are different people who worship differently.

About the issue of music appealing to the flesh... none of us would do any music that appealed only to the flesh (like brother Lamb mentioned). But I'm not sure I have ever heard a contemporary praise song that made me want to go out and sin. That's the Biblical idea of the flesh.

 

How about we always stand when we sing? [Note: this is the same for both services - traditional/creedal and the blended/contemporary.] Personally, I think we always sing better while standing (plus it lets you see the screens a bit better). Also, we stand during other parts of the worship service -- Call to Worship, Common Confession, etc.