Hip hop church

[Bro. Williams]

Steven 2006
I agree with you, but I find it ironic when I used that exact same verse towards your stance about RW, you had none of it.

I see your point and it is noted. Like I stated, i would have none of the hip-hop movement, nor the Purpose momement. I know not if the hip-hop church will be preaching the gospel, if so, I support that part and only such, and rejoice in that.
If RW is preaching the gospel, I support that part and only such and rejoice in that.

(Note, some days we are less likely to shoot to kill. Today is such)

 

[ShotGunWillie]

I agree with you, but I find it ironic when I used that exact same verse towards your stance about RW, you had none of it.

That's because rap music hasn't created as much damage in today's churches as RW has. Rap music will probably catch up, I can't wait, I have just been waiting to begin wearing my Gold Mercedes Symbol and chain again.

 

[tenor]

One should not change their worship to accomodate man or man's definition of worship.

One should change their worship to reflect what God desires.

And what are these desires of God that cannot be expressed by using a "popular" style of music?

CCk, it seems you equate content and style as one and the same.

Check out I Cor. 9:22 and Philippians 1:18. I believe this answers at least part of the "style" question. Note - I in no way see teh message (content) being changed, only the way it is presented.

 

[ShotGunWillie]

All of these questions are fine, but I fail to see what they have to do with the question of which time signatures, key signatures, melodies, chords, notes, etc. are inherently evil.

Could you not see I clearly avoided that portion of the post?

 

[SBCPreacher]

Hip hop is musical profanity. It is a distortion of form that carries with it an immoral message inherently. The words don't change that.

You opinion.

 

[npetreley]

I have just been waiting to begin wearing my Gold Mercedes Symbol and chain again.

Right on! I pity the po fool who mocks my chains!

 

[SBCPreacher]

A church that uses worldly values to attract a worldly crowd will also preach a worldly message. The preachers that allow hip-hop will preach messages that are not offensive to the hip-hoppers. They will tickle their ears with a watered-down gospel.

Another opinion. No facts here.

 

[Steven2006]

I see your point and it is noted. Like I stated, i would have none of the hip-hop movement, nor the Purpose momement. I know not if the hip-hop church will be preaching the gospel, if so, I support that part and only such, and rejoice in that.
If RW is preaching the gospel, I support that part and only such and rejoice in that.

(Note, some days we are less likely to shoot to kill. Today is such)

I appreciate, and respect that answer. Also, I agree with you on your views about both hip-hop, and RW as expressed in this post.

 

[SBCPreacher]

NO, the term is definitely watered down... to a weaker message.

The preacher who will allow hip-hop will water down his message so as not to offend a hip-hopper.

He will not preach that the indecent way they wear their clothes is against what the Bible teaches for fear of losing them from the congregation.

He will not preach a message to come out of the worldly ways and values and be separate unto the Lord for fear of them leaving the congregation and his numbers looking bad.

He will not preach the full counsel of God but will tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear.

His may think they are fully doing God's Will, but are in all actually, a lukewarm church.

Again, just your opinion. You don't know what a person will do.

 

[ShotGunWillie]

Right on! I pity the po fool who mocks my chains!

I use to sport a large alarm clock, but peeps in corporate america is down on brutha, giving him no mad props fo tha digs yo.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Music in itself is AMORAL.

If this is true, then why do we have terms like "funeral dirge"? Why don't nightclubs play Beethoven?

The answer is because music means something, before you ever put any words to it at all. We understand that certain types of music are appropriate in certain venues, and the reason we understand that is because music has meaning and it is self-evident in many cases.

 

[npetreley]

I use to sport a large alarm clock, but peeps in corporate america is down on brutha, giving him no mad props fo tha digs yo.

LOL!!! Where did I put my rap dictionary again?

 

[tinytim]

Jesus did not use a version. He was the Word that came down from heaven and dwelt among men.

You say Jesus did not use the KJV... I submit to you He did not use the NIV, NASB, HCSB, ESV, ERV, Douay-Rheims, nor any other MV on the market.

What scripture did he read from in Luke 4?

It does not match what is in the KJV.

He did to use a version..
And while I am disagreeing with you...

Music is amoral... :laugh:

 

[ShotGunWillie]

The answer is because music means something, before you ever put any words to it at all. We understand that certain types of music are appropriate in certain venues, and the reason we understand that is because music has meaning and it is self-evident in many cases.

Certain music gets specific reactions, emotional, anxiety, wild crazed, and so on...

 

[CheeseCrackerKidd]

Is God really speaking against viols, or is he speaking against something else?





This is not proof text against viols, but against transgressions, sins and injustices.

I would have to disagree. It is quite obvious that these people were very religious. They were looking forward to the 'day of the Lord' according to Amos 5:18. But it was not only their hearts that were not right. Their music and their worship were also not pleasing to God.

This passage clearly shows that putting Christian lyrics to just any kind of music does not change the music one iota. It is still the same music.

Let me ask, if the music itself is pleasing to God, why change the lyrics at all? Why not just play the music without any words?

It is quite obvious that the music feeds the spirit and the flesh, when one looks at it in light of the previous question.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Nobody addressed my earlier point about churches in other countries. I have seen videos of mission churches, that had much different styles of music, where if sung here would sound unorodox to say the least. They still seemed to be very Godly Churches, just adapted towards their culture. Now is that wrong? I mean if there is just one biblical standard, as many have suggested, it wouldn't be confined to borders? How would you condone mission started Churches allowing for local culture to influence the service? Do you take that stand when a missionary visits your Church? If not are you not being hypocritical?

can't answer you there, despite your drive-by on our churches' preference for acapella in worship.
besides, we don't have missionaries visiting our churces, since we don't send out missionaries.
oh, I take that back.
I took a couple of "Arminian" Filipino Baptist pastors to our Primitive church some years ago, to give testimony on how they are doing work in the Philippines, and had to rebuke them in private for testifying how they "live in faith" and in the same breath ask for financial support "for the Lord's work".
Just didn't think it sounded right.
Too transparent.
You live by faith, then you live by faith.
You come to the States and testify how God has been good to you despite the poverty and how He has supplied your needs and all that then it don't seem appropriate to end with a plea for support.
Oh, but, before you say anything about how callous Primitive Baptists seem to be, they did go away with five hundred dollars, a new laptop each, and three boxfuls of books and old clothes from members of the church and some visiting members from other Primitive churches.

 

[ccrobinson]

ShotGunWillie said:

Could you not see I clearly avoided that portion of the post?

Heh.

Yes, I noticed, thus I stated the question again for you. :wavey:

 

[tenor]

If this is true, then why do we have terms like "funeral dirge"? Why don't nightclubs play Beethoven?

The answer is because music means something, before you ever put any words to it at all. We understand that certain types of music are appropriate in certain venues, and the reason we understand that is because music has meaning and it is self-evident in many cases.

Once again, usage NOT musicality. Style NOT substance. Beethoven and other composers, have been used in night clubs - arrangements of great melodies.

Much of the communication of music has been culturally ingrained in us. I've taught Music Appreciation many times at the community college level and have found that the students are culturally conditioned to dislkie and/or mock anything "classical." Many "classical" themes and passages have become cliches that have absolutely nothing to do with the original intent of the composer. This has been brought on by usage, not the music itself.

I think we all need to listen to Peter Schickle's "Adventures in Good Music" in this sketch he calls the first movement of Beethoven's 5th Symphony as if it was a ball game. Wonderful piece. I would tell my students this is how I feel at most symphonic concerts. They couldn't understand it.

Most of our feelings toward music are culturally conditioned. We react however we are expected to react by our cultural niche.

 

[npetreley]

If this is true, then why do we have terms like "funeral dirge"? Why don't nightclubs play Beethoven?

The answer is because music means something, before you ever put any words to it at all. We understand that certain types of music are appropriate in certain venues, and the reason we understand that is because music has meaning and it is self-evident in many cases.

You have a point, but not a moral one. Music does convey moods. That's the reason for the term "mode" for different scales. One could also argue that music communicates more than just moods, but even music theory majors have a hard time making a solid case. "Program music" supposedly conveys extra-musical ideas without the use of words (for example, Moussorgsky's "Pictures at an exhibition"). The jury is out on program music, IMO. Beethoven's 8th symphony pokes fun at the metronome, and that seems very obvious to me NOW, but I never would have guessed the connection until someone pointed it out to me.

Regardless, you'd have to go a LONG way to prove that music can convey moral moods or moral extra-musical ideas without words. I challenge anyone to do that.

 

[ShotGunWillie]

Yes, I noticed, thus I stated the question again for you.

Thanks for the concern and well being you have for my eyesight.