MMF - Biblical Principles for Church Music

[DHK]

Quote:
"YOu had pointd out the term "SPIRITUAL songs" in the passages indicated, and said songs not so labeled were UNspiritual. You qualified nothing about any other terms involved, and you said music is "spiritual" or "unspritual." Furthermore-- using your own suggestion, a compilation of dictionary definitions say "psalm--" or "psalmos--" is a song sung to a harp, akin to verb, "psallein--" to twitch; play. So, if you are claiming any song sung to a twitched harp is "spritual," that shows the fallacy of your reasoning. "Hymn" is a song *in honor of* someone or something, not necessarily Deity...the "Marine's Hymn," for example, is sung in honor of that branch of the service. So if you need confirmation that psalms and hymns are natural and "worldly," (besides the fact that they are played physically on physical instruments), it is there. A psalm is played in the natural world with a physical stringed instrument, whether you like that fact or not. And it is detected by vibrations on one's eardrum, a part of the natural physical world."

Again, your logic is misconstrued my dear brother. A spiritual song can be nothing else than a spiritual song. That part should be fairly obvious. Conversely, the same is true for carnal. As for definitions of other terms please remember that even while discussing CCM, we must heed to CCC---Context! Context! Context! In the "context" of Paul's letter to either the Ephesians or Colossians, no where is there mention of a "Marine's Hymn," or any hymn sung in honor of the marines. Your illogical reasoning takes Biblical terms and defines them with unbilblical meanings. What kind of logic is that?
I never said "any song sung to a twitched harp is 'spiritual.'" Those are your words. I have said in the past that any instrument, if used properly, can be used for the glory of God. Most musicians use their instruments to glorify themselves and their egos, rather than God.
Psalms are Scripture. Obviously they are not worldly--of the world that we are commanded not to love!
When a Psalm is put to music, the music may or may not be worldly, depending on the musician and how he plays his instrument. Hymns follow the same basic rule. Usually, when I hear "Amazing Grace" being sung or played in the traditional way it sounds like a beautiful hymn, and it is. But I have heard, and no doubt you have to, "Amazing Grace" butchered to the rock beat of some worldly musician, who thought he could make a buck by putting good Christian lyrics to "worldly music." Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world..." That includes the music of the world. There is obviously a type of music that our Heavenly Father likes, and a type that he hates. "For whosoever shall be a friend of the world is the enemy of God" The Bible does not contradict itself Rockfort. Christ died for the world in that he died for each one of us, but he certainly did not die for the things of this world--that which he hates, and that which is carnal and draws Christians farther and farther away from Him.
Is your music spiritual or carnal?
DHK

 

[Rockfort]

< A spiritual song can be nothing else than a spiritual song. >

Sung with "spiritual" vocal chords, played on "spiritual" instruments? It sure would be dandy if we could do that, but our vocal chords and our instruments are physical and natural.

Your quote: "Read Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 again, look up the words "psalms," "Hymns," and "spiritual songs" in the original languages if you have to, but at least in a good dictionary."

My response: "a compilation of dictionary definitions say "psalm--" or "psalmos--" is a song sung to a harp, akin to verb, "psallein--" to twitch; play. So, if you are claiming any song sung to a twitched harp is "spritual," that shows the fallacy of your reasoning. "Hymn" is a song *in honor of* someone or something, not necessarily Deity."

Your response: "As for definitions of other terms please remember that even while discussing CCM, we must heed to CCC---Context! Context! Context! In the "context" of Paul's letter to either the Ephesians or Colossians, no where is there mention of a "Marine's Hymn," or any hymn sung in honor of the marines. Your illogical reasoning takes Biblical terms and defines them with unbilblical meanings. What kind of logic is that? I never said "any song sung to a twitched harp is 'spiritual.'"

On the matter of looking up words, you sure went from a proponent to a detractor right quick! I follow your suggestion, you don't like it yields, and then you say, "Context! Context! Context!" Well, make up your mind-- is something to be gained by considering the meanings of the terms involved or not?

Yelling "Context" is usually a copout by someone who sees the scripture does not say what they want it to say. I have read Jehovah's Witnesses literature which uses that scheme against Bible readers who see Jesus says, "I and the Father are One," and we (accordig to them) take it *out of context*. 'Churches of Christ' say others take Ephesians 2:8 ("saved...not of works") *out of context*. So anyone who spouts "Context!" should be suspect about the stands they take.

< I have said in the past that any instrument, if used properly, can be used for the glory of God. >

Now show us a scriptural designation of "proper." Show us the limitations of time, tone, phrasing, emphasis, et al. If there were precise definitions to the elements of music, testing whether a piece is "proper" would be simple. The idea of "proper," though, is YOUR idea, and scripture does not give any such precise data.

< Psalms are Scripture. >

That is not the definition of psalm, which you requested I look up.

< Usually, when I hear "Amazing Grace" being sung or played in the traditional way it sounds like a beautiful hymn, and it is. But I have heard, and no doubt you have to, "Amazing Grace" butchered to the rock beat of some worldly musician... >

The words remain the same, regardless of it being sung/played the "traditional" way. The verses you have dealt with say "SPEAK TO EACH OTHER in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." If the words come through, they have been so SPOKEN.

< ...who thought he could make a buck by putting good Christian lyrics to "worldly music." >

Are you telepathic on top of the rest of this? *Bucks* are made in a heap of ways on Christian things/concepts. Piles of bucks are made selling hymnals, books, tracts...and then by preaching and speaking, doing weddings, seminars... the fact that people make their bucks off Christian activities is not convincing in any exclusive way of one method over another.

< There is obviously a type of music that our Heavenly Father likes, and a type that he hates. >

No, it's not so obvious. God looks on the inside, not the outside (I Samuel 16:7). And not a piano, nor organ, nor guitar are on the *inside* of a person. And the sound waves which eminate from singing exist in a medium *outside* the person, who may or may not mean a word of what comes out. God does not need to hear it come out to know the heart and mind of the person.

So answer this question: Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?

 

[DHK]

Rockfort:
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
I have shown you context. I have given you definitions. I have demonstrated to from Biblical passages what could be considered a “proper” style of music. But it is you that remains not open to the clear teaching of the Word of God in this area. Go back in the posts and read the five Biblical principles of Christian music. Follow the link to the supporting website. See if you agree with it. Then form an opinion.
As for context., I have not taken Eph.5:19 and Col.3:16 out of its context; you have. You have by redefining its terms. You turn around and accuse me, and say that it what the JW’s do. Yes it is, but not what I do, what you do. You change the meanings, and redefine the words to your own liking. Any one with very little intelligence can see that a hymn as defined in the Word of God is not referring to a hymn as sung to the marines, or in honor thereof, but incredulously you do. Redefining terms is New Orthodoxy. The SDA’s are very good at it. So are most liberals. You have redefined a psalm outside of the Biblical context of what a psalm is. You do not want to accept the Bible for what it says. You want to force your ideas of music into the Bible at any cost; even if it means perverting the Scriptures to the nth degree.
I have shown you “proper styles” of music. But “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf.
Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him.
There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it?
Your idea is to force the world’s music into heaven.
Rockfort, I say this only to point out the truth of God’s Word, and not meaning and personal offence to you, but:
You are an adulterer. You are a married person committing adultery. Check James 4:4
CCM is married to the world and you, if your saved are married to Christ. You have departed from your Bridegroom and gone and committed adultery with the world which God hates. “Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God. He starts of that verse by saying “Ye adulterers and adulteresses.”
Is your music spiritual or worldly? Which are you defending?

DHK

 

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have shown you “proper styles” of music. But “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf.
Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him.
There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This has gotten ridiculous. Now we see "styles" of music in vagure references to music in the Bible. The Golden calf incident is the closest thing in identifying a style, since it involved dancing, which probably made it lively. But the other Scriptures on the "good" music give no such evidence as to the style. Where do you get simple piano or organ melodies from the account of David and Saul, or Rev. 4&5? Even the "harp" was different from what we think of, but we read mellow symphonic styles into this. The biggest evidence against your arguments is that "wild dancing" was also used by David as worship to God, and He accepted it.
All this shows is as I said on my page, that music was generally lively (both sacred and secular) and the determining factor in its spiritual worth was what the song was about, or who the worship was being directed to. There were always plain melodies, but the austere "traditional" music you insist was mentioned by name in scripture was largely from Greek Platonic influence centuries after the Old Testament was written.
You are reiterating the same points over and over, and not adressing these facts that contradict your arguments, just like Cloud, Godwin, and the rest of them. And also like them, I see, people who disagree are likened to atheists and others who deny the Bible

 

[DHK]

8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

Eric, can you honestly say in your heart that the new song that they are singing in verse nine, and the worship of the lamb in verses 12-14, is all done to the beat of rock music, or even has the remote possibility of being sung to rock music?

 

[Rockfort]

&lt; A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. &gt;

Ain't that an outstanding piece of wit you just made up there?

&lt; I have shown you context. &gt;

You have shown PREtext.

&lt; I have given you definitions. &gt;

Nope, I was the one who posted the definitions from the dictionary, at YOUR suggestion.

&lt; I have demonstrated to from Biblical passages what could be considered a “proper” style of music. &gt;

Nothing but your own incompetent opinions.

&lt; As for context., I have not taken Eph.5:19 and Col.3:16 out of its context &gt;

If you don't "speak" with 3 different things-- psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs-- you have.

&lt; You have by redefining its terms. &gt;

Make it plain here-- did you, or did you not, request me to look up definitions of 'psalms' and 'hymns?' The fact that the definitions do not say what you want them to say is immaterial.

&lt; You turn around and accuse me, and say that it what the JW’s do. &gt;

No, I did not turn around as I said that.

&lt; You change the meanings, and redefine the words to your own liking. &gt;

LOL. Silly displacement. I gave the definitions at are your own urging, by the methods you suggested.

&lt; You have redefined a psalm outside of the Biblical context of what a psalm is &gt;

When you suggested I look up the word in a dictionary did you think it would be in a biblical context? If not, why did you suggest it?

&lt; I have shown you “proper styles” of music. &gt;

You have shown nothing but your worthless musical critique.

&lt; If I could give you absolute 100% infallible evidence that what I say is absolutely true, the real question remains, would you accept my evidence? The answer is no doubt, NO! &gt;

Wrong. The answer here is Yes. Try finding the other 99% and then maybe we can see.

&lt; Just like the skeptics and atheists who do not accept the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. &gt;

Don't be THAT hard on yourself.

&lt; Style of music is given in Exodus when Israel danced naked around a golden calf. &gt;

Don't you wish? "It is not the sound of triumph, nor is it the sound of defeat; but the sound of singing I hear (Exodus 32:18)." A crowd can be singing "Danny Boy," "Young at Heart," "Love Me Tender," or "Rancho Grande," and it is not the sound of triumph or defeat, but the sound of singing. Don't that say alot about 'style?'

&lt; Style of music is given when David subdued Saul’s spirit by playing before him, and the demon departed from him. &gt;

It is, huh? In I Samuel 16-19 it says the evil spirit departed when David "played the harp with his hand." Ain't that a lot of details about style? Had it been Harpo Marx, who also played harp with his hand, would it have worked too?

&lt; There is a definite style of music in Heaven given in Revelation 4 and 5—why don’t you read about it? &gt;

The living creatures and the elders around the throne each had a harp and sang a "new song." Ain't that a "definite style?"

&lt; Your idea is to force the world’s music into heaven. &gt;

I have no *idea* of forcing ANYTHING into heaven, as if that were possible. Your false accusations are stupefying.

&lt; I say this only to point out the truth of God’s Word, and not meaning and personal offence to you, but: You are an adulterer. &gt;

You stoopid sludgehead, what are your plans? to stone me?

&lt; CCM is married to the world and you, if your saved are married to Christ. &gt;

"Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, 'Jesus is accursed''; and no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,'' except by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 12:3)." If a song proclaims Jesus as Lord, the scripture says that can not be said *except by the Holy Spirit." Do you say otherwise?

As to your idea of loving ['being married to'] the things of the world, you need to be asked: If you own a car, do you wash it, vacuum it, wax it, try to keep it free from scratches? Are you *loving a thing of the world* if you do these? You obviously have access to one or more computers-- do you *love* them? Do you select foods without regard to your taste? If you claim you do not use and enjoy many things of this world only [not the next], you are a liar. Your use of this principle is a front to slam someone else's tastes which differ from your own. And incidentally that person who differs in 'taste' would not be myself the vast majority of the time.

Are you a coward to answer this question? ... Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?

 

[Daniel]

OPEN NOTE TO ROCKFORT AND DHK: please stop it! You guys are accomplishing nothing by this back and forth slam-fest. I have repeatedly wanted to post from a reasoned, Biblical POV; however,I have been grieved in my spirit and literally shut-down from posting because of the cyber-tomatoes being hurled at each other. What are you accomplishing? Have you noticed that rlvaughn (starter of this thread) hasn't posted either? Do you think this is a coincidence? I hope we can see a reasonable tempering in the upcoming posts. Please consider this appeal. Thank you, fellows.

[ July 24, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

[ July 24, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]

 

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Eric, can you honestly say in your heart that the new song that they are singing in verse nine, and the worship of the lamb in verses 12-14, is all done to the beat of rock music, or even has the remote possibility of being sung to rock music?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody ever said it was "rock music". That's just a straw man. Just what is "rock music anyway? As I say on my page: "They make all of music seem so black-and-white, like it's a choice between "rock" and everything else. But then "rock" as they define it is &lt;B&gt; a very broad category,&lt;/B&gt; including hard and soft rock, and even R&B, disco and jazz are apart of it. Basically, "rock" is another word for...music with [certain] elements, such as the beat."
Remember, the main issue is the assumption that only classical and "traditional" styles meet "Biblical principles". Once again, you read of "harps" in these verses, and immediately think of mellow classic type music. That is the mistake you are making. Then you challenge us "was that rock", and without mentioning it, the imnference is that it really must have been classical/traditional. After all, as I said, the battle is between rock and traditional, as if those were the ony styles to choose from. And "harp" means "classical", doesn't it? But a string instrument can be played many ways, (as the guitar). The harp has even appeared in rock and other pop music.

So no, I'm not saying it was "rock", but the point is, is that it also didn't fit the criterion you and other critics judge music on-- that it's plain, with very diminished rhythm, and has no effect on the body (as in dancing), and that it had the form of what we call "hymns" today.

 

[DHK]

"As to your idea of loving ['being married to'] the things of the world, you need to be asked: If you own a car, do you wash it, vacuum it, wax it, try to keep it free from scratches? Are you *loving a thing of the world* if you do these? You obviously have access to one or more computers-- do you *love* them? Do you select foods without regard to your taste? If you claim you do not use and enjoy many things of this world only [not the next], you are a liar. Your use of this principle is a front to slam someone else's tastes which differ from your own. And incidentally that person who differs in 'taste' would not be myself the vast majority of the time."

"Are you a coward to answer this question? ... Which is your preference-- a man singing "Amazing Grace" in the 'tradional' way who means not a word of the song? or one who sings it to a rock or jazz type of beat, who has been freed from drugs by the grace of God and is using the style of music familiar to him?"

I will gladly answer your questions and more. But I would hope that you would first understand the concept of "worldliness." I have posted these verses before, so I'll just give the references now: James 4:4; Romans 12:2; 1 John 2:15,16. There are other verses but these three ought to be sufficient. Every time I mention these verses and the subject worldliness you sidestep the entire issue by saying that everything is of the world--a copout. You then explain "Love not the world." Be not conformed to this world." "Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God." I will wait for your answer. But the above post will not do.
Yes, I have a car, own a computer, eat food, etc. And like everyone else I enjoy many things that God has provided for me. To God I am grateful, not to this world. It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. I don't owe a cent to this world. I owe it all to God. If it were not for Him I would not be here today, I would not be alive, I would not have salvation, and I would not have the privilege of explaining all this to you.
Having possessions does not make one worldly. It is your attitude toward those possessions that may cause you to be worldly. Can you do without them? Will they keep you from serving Christ? Will they keep you from growing closer to the Lord? What is the influence that your possessions will have on your life? That influence, of course, is determined largely by your attitude.
In reference to music, generally speaking, CCM mimics the world: talks like, walks like, acts like the world. You can't tell any difference. We have the Edmonton Trappers baseball team here, which is the farm team for the Minnesota Twins. Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. I can't remember the name of the band. If it wasn't worldly the world would not accept it. The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? Does your music conform to Christ, or to the world, which one?

Which do I prefer--a man singing "Amazing grace" traditionally who doesn't mean it, or one who sings rock and had been freed from drugs...? Neither one.
In the first scenario, a very common one I would admit, I would encourage the person to think about what he is singing. Most Christians fall into that trap; they don't think about the words they are singing, and most of the time they don't really mean it when they do. For example, when you sing "I surrender all," have you? "Make me a channel of blessing," Do you really mean it. "Send the light, Send the light" Are you the one willing to be sent? I am speaking here to all Christians. There is a need to think about the words that we sing, and perhaps not sing them if we can't sing them from our own heart.
In the second scenario, I would rather that God would put a new song in his heart, not the old rock of the world. A new believer needs to get the world out of him. "Old things are passed away; all things are become new." He is a new creature in Christ. Why hang on to the old worldly music? If God can free him from drugs, I know God can free him from rock as well.

DHK

 

[hugo]

DHK,

Do you think that in Heaven we will be doing what Ps150 says "praise Him with the timbrel and dance?"

The timbrel or tabret was a drumlike instrument. Cymbals are mentioned too.

Don't know if "rock" will be up there, but there will probably be drums and a beat and it will be spiritual. Matter of fact, I think every kind of music known to man will be put to use praising Jesus.

Viva Voce rocks
hugo

 

[DHK]

“Do you think that in Heaven we will be doing what Ps150 says "praise Him with the timbrel and dance?"
The timbrel or tabret was a drumlike instrument. Cymbals are mentioned too.
Don't know if "rock" will be up there, but there will probably be drums and a beat and it will be spiritual. Matter of fact, I think every kind of music known to man will be put to use praising Jesus. “

6. LIVING VOICES SHALL TAKE UP THE FAILING SOUNDS OF DEAD INSTRUMENTS, AND AS THEY CEASE ON EARTH, THOSE OF INTELLIGENT RANSOMED SPIRITS AND HOLY ANGELS, AS WITH THE SOUND OF MIGHTY THUNDERS, WILL PROLONG ETERNALLY THE PRAISE, SAYING: "ALLELUIA! SALVATION, AND GLORY, AND HONOR, AND POWER, UNTO THE LORD OUR GOD;" "ALLELUIA! FOR THE LORD GOD OMNIPOTENT REIGNETH." AMEN!

Verse 1. Praise God in his sanctuary. The Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, and the eastern versions, render it, "in his holy ones"; among his saints, in the assembly of them, where he is to be feared and praised: it may be translated, "in his Holy One", and be understood of Christ, as it is by Cocceius ... Some render it, "for" or "because of his holiness." The perfection of holiness in him; in which he is glorious and fearful in the praises of, and which appears in all his works of providence and grace. --John Gill.
Verse 2. Praise him for his mighty acts. Here is a reason for praise. In these deeds of power we see himself. These doings of his omnipotence are always on behalf of truth and righteousness. His works of creation, providence, and redemption, all call for praise; they are his acts, and his acts of might, therefore let him be praised for them.
Praise him according to his excellent greatness. His being is unlimited, and his praise should correspond therewith. He possesses a multitude or a plenitude of greatness, and therefore he should be greatly praised. There is nothing little about God, and there is nothing great apart from him. If we were always careful to make our worship fit and appropriate for our great Lord how much better should we sing! How much more reverently should we adore! Such excellent deeds should have excellent praise.
Verse 3. Trumpet: The name shophar means bright or clear, and the instrument may be conceived to have been so called from its clear and shrill sound, just as we call an instrument a "clarion", and speak of a musical tone as "brilliant" or" clear." In the service of God this shophar, or trumpet, was only employed in making announcements, and for calling the people together in the time of the holy solemnities, of war, of rebellion, or of any other great occasion. The strong sound of the instrument would have confounded a choir of singers, rather than have elevated their music. (John Kitto.) The shophar is especially interesting to us as being the only Hebrew instrument whose use on certain solemn occasions seems to be retained to this day.
The "psaltery" was a ten stringed instrument. It is constantly mentioned with the "harp." The psaltery was struck with a plectrum, the harp more gently with the fingers. Psaltery and harp speak to us in figure of "law and gospel." --Thomas Le Blanc.
Verse 4. Praise him with the timbrel and dance. Associated with the deliverance at the Red Sea, this form of worship set forth the most jubilant and exultant of worship. The hands and the feet were both employed, and the entire body moved in sympathy with the members. Are there not periods of life when we feel so glad that we would fain dance for joy? Let not such exhilaration be spent upon common themes, but let the name of God stir us to ecstasy. Let us exult as we cry,
"In the heavenly Lamb thrice happy I am,
And my heart it doth dance at the sound of his name."
There is enough in our holy faith to create and to justify the utmost degree of rapturous delight. If men are dull in the worship of the Lord our God they are not acting consistently with the character of their religion.
Praise him with stringed instruments and organs. We have here the three kinds of musical instruments: timbrels, which are struck, and strings, and pipes; let all be educated to praise the Lord. Nothing is common and unclean: all may be sanctified to highest uses. Many men, many minds, and these as different as strings and pipes; but there is only one God, and that one God all should worship. The word translated "organs" signifies pipe -- a simpler form of wind instrument than the more modern and more elaborate organ. Doubtless many a pious shepherd has poured out gracious pastorals from a reed or oaten pipe, and so has magnified his God.
Verse 4. Stringed instruments. Minnim (which is derived from a root signifying "division", or" distribution", hence strings) occurs in Psalms 45:8, and Psalms 150:4, and is supposed by some to denote a stringed instrument, but it seems merely a poetical allusion to the strings of any instrument. Thus, in Psalms 45:8, we would read, "Out of the ivory palaces the strings (i.e. concerts of music) have made thee glad"; and so in Psalms 150:4, "Praise him with strings (stringed instruments), and ugabs." --John Kitto.
Verse 5. Praise high upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. Let the clash of the loudest music be the Lord's: let the joyful clang of the loftiest notes be all for him. Praise has beaten the timbrel, swept the harp, and sounded the trumpet, and now for a last effort, awakening the most heavy of slumberers, and startling the most indifferent of onlookers, she dashes together the disks of brass, and with sounds both loud and high proclaims the glories of the Lord.
Verse 5. Loud cymbals ... high sounding cymbals. This important passage clearly points to two instruments under the same name, and leaves us to conclude that the Hebrews had both hand cymbals and finger cymbals (or castanets), although it may not in all cases be easy to say which of the two is intended in particular texts. --John Kitto.

Verse 6. Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord. "Let all breath praise him": that is to say, all living beings. He gave them breath, let them breathe his praise. His name is in the Hebrew composed rather of breathings than of letters, to show that all breath comes from him: therefore let it be used for him. Join all ye living things in the eternal song. Be ye least or greatest, withhold not your praises. What a day will it be when all things in all places unite to glorify the one only living and true God! This will be the final triumph of the church of God.

Praise ye the LORD. Once more, Hallelujah! Thus is the Psalm rounded with the note of praise; and thus is the Book of Psalms ended by a glowing word of adoration. Reader, wilt not thou at this moment pause a while, and worship the Lord thy God? Hallelujah!

This is a very long post, but I think an exposition of this psalm is warranted at this point. Most of this information came from Spurgeon’s “Treasury Of David.” Many commentators agree that there are no drums in the worship of Jehovah; in the worship of Satan, idols, and false gods yes, but in the worship of Jehovah—no. I don’t know where you are getting your information from, but you sounds like you could use some good commentaries, and perhaps some other helps will do like Greek and Hebrew lexicons, etc. There are no drums mentioned in this Psalm.
As for dancing, it amazes me how the CCM, new evangelicals, and charismatics, can take such a leap of faith from David’s “dance,” which is nothing more than leaping for joy, and apply that to the modern dance that you have to today’s rock bands. Incredulous! Amazing! David leapt for joy. He didn’t rock to the tunes of dctalk.
As for dance in heaven, where do you get such ideas. Read again Revelation 4 and 5. They worshipped the lamb—in fact the “bowed down and worshipped the lamb; the fell down before him in adoration and worship. That’s hardly dancing is it. They cast their crowns before Him, in an act of worship and adoration, respectfully, and reverently. You are not going to come before the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords swaying your hips to jazz, or rocking to the beat of CCM. “Every knee shall bow…”
Think about this also. David said every kind of musical instrument. Of course, as one commentator put it, he meant every kind of sacred musical instrument. But that thought aside, what makes you think that these same musical instruments (especially the ones used today)will be in heaven? I suppose many carnal Christians, who think John Denver is a Christian, believe that at the resurrection, he will be resurrected with his guitar in his hand. Do you think that you can take your piano, guitar, drums, etc. to heaven with you? Our minds are finite. God is infinite. How can a finite mind understand an infinite God? Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, we have no understanding what heaven is really like. What makes man think that God is going to accept man’s carnal inventions into heaven? Don’t you think that he will have something better prepared for us? “I go to prepare a place for you.” Yes, a better one, praise God.
DHK

 

[Daniel]

What you just posted, DHK, was what I've been waiting for for the last several pages. This is the path we need to be on. Let's ALL walk therein! Let's keep away from the personal assaults like the ones we referred to and were disgusted by in the earlier posts on this thread. Now we can get somewhere, regardless of our persuasion! Keep it going brethren! We are now getting back to the title of this thread--Biblical Principles for Church Music. Hallelujah!

 

[hugo]

DHK,

"timbrels, which are struck"

As your quote said, all instruments may be sanctified for spiritual uses.

You shouldn't make the mistake of claiming that since everyone was bowing down in worship in that passage in Rev that all we'll be doing for eternity is bowing down.

Again I fail to see how any particular sound or combination of sounds produced on earthly instruments is inherently evil.

That any sound is associated with evil is only due to the fact that man has used it for an evil purpose. Stripped of its evil use, I believe any sound or music can be sanctified and used for the glory of God.

The problem here is not the music but weak christians whose conscience won't let them enjoy music which they once only associated with evil (Rom 14). I can sympathize and will accomodate them when necessary but I refuse to be imprisoned by those who want to judge my liberty in Christ.

make a joyful noise
hugo

 

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. I can't remember the name of the band. If it wasn't worldly the world would not accept it. The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "world" does like classical music, only it's a different segment and generation of the world from the one that likes rock. Watch atheistic science/nature shows on TV, and you'll see they often use classical styles.
BJU and other fundamentalists schools are rejected more for their own follies than because of Christ. In other words, it's not their faithfulness to God's Word that is causing them to be despised, but their UNfaithfulness to it, which is causing unnecessary offense. (See Rom.2:24) 1 Peter 4:15 shows that we can "suffer" for our own sins. Yet people always take that as proof they must be right. The Jehovah's Witnesses also frequently qoute "The World hates us because we are of the truth", when in reality, the world is annoyed at them because they bug people at their door, and shove their literature in their face. We are annoyed at them for their false doctrine.
Likewise, just because rock styles may get more of a cheer than classical and especially dry old hymn styles doesn't automatically make the former wrong and the latter right. The latter style is heavily influenced by an unnatural, unscriptural platonic rejection of feelings that was prevalent in the Church of the past. This is not right, and their must be some balance in our music. If we are truly faithful to the Word of God, then those in the world who are not being led by the Spirit will continue to despise us, yet some will see the light in us and start to be led to Christ. Let us not try to get in the Spirit's way by making up our own ideas of what is associated with Christ, that are not even in the Bible.
We don't know which group was mentioned, and there are many that cross the line with some of the gimmicks, and may cross over into a secular audience (Didn't U2 start out as a "Christian" group? Stryper may be right behind them). I'm not condoning all of this, but remember, the style and beat is what this argument is about. Just because some may go overboard doesn't prove this whole point that anything with a certain beat is bad, or your insistence that a harp in the Bible proves it is advocating classical styles.

 

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for dancing, it amazes me how the CCM, new evangelicals, and charismatics, can take such a leap of faith from David’s “dance,” which is nothing more than leaping for joy, and apply that to the modern dance that you have to today’s rock bands. Incredulous! Amazing! David leapt for joy. He didn’t rock to the tunes of dctalk.
As for dance in heaven, where do you get such ideas. Read again Revelation 4 and 5. They worshipped the lamb—in fact the “bowed down and worshipped the lamb; the fell down before him in adoration and worship. That’s hardly dancing is it. They cast their crowns before Him, in an act of worship and adoration, respectfully, and reverently. You are not going to come before the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords swaying your hips to jazz, or rocking to the beat of CCM. “Every knee shall bow…”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nobody's saying that the dancing in the Bible or in Heaven is exactly like rock or jazz. But the point is, it appears not to be like the old hymns, either. As Rockfort said:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Old time music lends itself more to contemplation. CCM lends itself more to excitation. Neither one is inherently spiritual are they? It takes context and words to establish the spirituality or worldliness of a song. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There may be some contemplative singing when we fall down before Him (But it will still probably be more alive than many of those old hymns, and it's not the words I'm talking about, but the music styles traditionalist churches put to them.

But also, joyous lively music will have its place as well, as it was used for celebration. What you need to do is go back and look at the links that you and others have posted. The critics all claim there is to be absolutely no fleshy pleasure in the music at all. That means, not even David's leaping for joy would be acceptable. Be consistent, here! Don't the critics constantly put down charismatics who leap for joy? This is not "sensuous rock/jazz dancing (and charismatic churches have been the loudest critics of that) even though I would admit that alot of them go way overboard.
"Flesh" is totally misunderstood as purely the physical body (when in the Bible it refers to our fallen nature, which often manifests itself in physical bodily "sins"). This includes pride, and in many people that contemplative "traditional" music evokes feelings of "pride" (at making one "civilized" or "cultured" or being superior to the lively music of the "barbarians"). This is just as much of "the flesh". My father (who is not saved) used to say "hey, if they want to just sit there and get their intellectual kick out of that plain music, that's good for them, but I want to boogie". Which is really better? And the fact that lively music that does elicit a physical reation is used, the whole contention is flawed. SO once, again, it is not "rock", but it is also more than the dry, often dead medieval to early 20th century styles that CCM critics seem to advocate

 

[Rockfort]

&lt; Yes, I have a car, own a computer, eat food, etc. And like everyone else I enjoy many things that God has provided for me. &gt;

That statement ends one phase of all this rot. You are enjoying things of this world, while "friendship with the world is enmity with God." If you claim this is not "friendship with the world," this just shows you attach that lable only to things you personally do not care for. YOU ain't that standard, bud.

&lt; It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. &gt;

Yeah? Quit your job or any income-earning business and give all your money away, then see if these "funds" are still there and coming in.

&lt; In reference to music, generally speaking, CCM mimics the world &gt;

Any music "mimics" the world because we have no music outside of the world. We could not play it or hear if such were not done through natural [worldly] means.

&lt; You can't tell any difference. &gt;

I once heard of [did not hear it live] a song performed on latenight television which mocked the idea of the gospel and the second coming with the line, "Some say beware, but I don't care!..." Can YOU tell no difference between this and "We Shall Behold Him," or "My Deliverer is Coming?" You are a sorry mushbrain if you can tell no difference between a song which proclaims the gospel and one which mocks it.

&lt; Just a few days ago they announced that following the game the well known Christian band,_____, will be playing after the game. ...The world accepts CCM because it is no different then it's own music. They would never invite a quartet or choral group from Bob Jones University to sing there would they? &gt;

A chorale group from my church was invited to sing the national anthem and a song of their choice at a major league game. So what would you chew at in relation to that?-- that they are being "friends of the world" by singing at a ballgame or by singing the national anthem?

&lt; Which do I prefer--a man singing "Amazing grace" traditionally who doesn't mean it, or one who sings rock and had been freed from drugs...? Neither one...In the second scenario, I would rather that God would put a new song in his heart, not the old rock of the world. A new believer needs to get the world out of him. "Old things are passed away; all things are become new." &gt;

"Amazing Grace" would be that NEW SONG to such a person described. Again you seek to omit the actual core of the statements in those verses we have discussed, which is, "SPEAK TNE ANOTHER in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." It is the WORDS which matter, by which we speak. And that is what this newly saved person-- a true person and a friend of mine; and not a hypothetical person, I might add-- is doing. He may not be doing it according to YOUR style, but that simply comes back to I Corinthians 12:3, which says he could not proclaim the Lordship of Jesus Christ-- which he does-- "except by the Holy Spirit." John Newton, who wrote "Amazing Grace," was saved from his defiance of God and his trading slaves (if my info is correct), and this other person was saved from drug addiction and promiscuity...but your concern is music style. If they don't sing and play music your way, then does that prove they are still "of the world" and not saved? You have not yet said it just that way, and that is why I am asking.

 

[DHK]

Rockfort:
“Love not the world.”
“Be not conformed to the world.”
“Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”
Not once have you even attempted to give an explanation of these verses. Do they even exist in your Bible? What do they mean to you, if every thing is of the world? God puts an obvious distinction between worldly things and spiritual things, even in music. Please explain these verses. Don’t hide behind the bushes any longer!

&lt; It is God that provided me the funds for the car and the computer, and it is the Lord that not only causes the food to grow in the field, but "gives me my daily bread" as well. &gt;
“Yeah? Quit your job or any income-earning business and give all your money away, then see if these "funds" are still there and coming in.”

I would challenge you to do the same. The problem with most Westernized Christians is that they do not know how to live by faith. They have every thing handed to them: a secure job and income that gives them food to eat and a roof over their head, as well as their other various other needs and wants.
Jesus said, “Deny yourself, take up your cross daily, and follow me.” Are you willing to do that?
In 1983 the Lord called us to Pakistan. We spent a year and a half on deputation and raised $700.00 per month support. On that support, in July of 1984, we left (my wife, two-year old son, and myself) for the nation of Pakistan. Just a few weeks before, we sold everything we had at a garage sale—everything, including things that meant a lot to us given at our wedding. Yes, I had quit my “income-earning job,” given or sold everything , that we might pay for our tickets over there. Ask any reputable mission board if $700.00 per month is enough to live on for a family of four even in Pakistan. Most recommend about $2,000.00. I say a family of four because my wife was six months pregnant at the time. We arrived in a nation where we did not understand the language, the culture, and even the food was so much different. Temperatures were reaching toward 50 degrees Celsius or 120 Farenheit. Have you ever come to the place in your life, Rockfort, where you have had to pray, even travail in prayer, that God would provide something so essential as a refrigerator? We have. It is God that provides our needs, not the world. It is God that provides our “daily bread,” not the world. Or, don’t you believe in that prayer? We stayed in Pakistan for seven years until the Gulf War broke out and had to come home. I am still supported as a missionary, work as a missionary, just on a different mission field now. Our income has not increased substantially. We still trust the Lord. He still provides, even for the most basic of things. But most people, even Christians don’t understand this—they don’t understand what it is to live a life of faith. Try to explain that to a banker when applying for a mortgage on a house!! My God owns the cattle on a thousand hills, the wealth in every mine; He owns the rivers and the rocks and rills; The sun and stars that shine. Wonderful riches more than tongue can tell, He is my Father, so their mine as well He owns the cattle on a thousand hills, I know that He will care for me.
DHK

 

[Daniel]

DHK: I knew from reading your posts that you had learned to trust the Lord. This weak, sick, anemic generation of Christians don't have the foggiest idea what it means to trust the Lord. I am including myself in that lot! Yes, I have been in full-time Christian service for 18 years, but I've never had to trust the Lord to the level you and your family have had to learn such trust. Thanks for your testimony. It's good to sometimes step back from the back-and-forth barrage so characteristic of baptistboard and look at something far bigger than ourselves and our puny opinions. Thanks for throwing some light into the dark tunnel of this thread. Glory to God!!!

 

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> “Love not the world.”
“Be not conformed to the world.”
“Whosoever is a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”
Not once have you even attempted to give an explanation of these verses. Do they even exist in your Bible? What do they mean to you, if every thing is of the world? God puts an obvious distinction between worldly things and spiritual things, even in music. Please explain these verses. Don’t hide behind the bushes any longer <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is one:
(from my page: http://members.aol.com.etb700/ccm.html/appendixScriptures on Separation

1 John 2:15, 16-- "Love not the world, nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but of the world." This verse had always been used by pietist preachers to forbid all "worldly entertainments", such as movies, shows, TV, etc., (no matter how clean it might have been). But this interpretation is based on the idea of liking the things of the world. The Greek word translated "love" that basically means "like" is phileo. But the word used in this passage is agape! The same word used in John 3:16, about God loving the world enough to give His only Son. Also, passages that tell us to love one another (John 15:12), and even our enemies (Matt.5:44). So God is basically telling us not to love the world as He did love it when giving us His Son, or as we are to love one another. And even our enemies! This right here seems to contradict John's statement, but all of these are sacrificial love, or an all-out kind of love. So what it seems to be saying is not to live for the world (and the context mentions the world passing away(next verse). We are to dedicate our lives to God and our fellow brothers, and to sacrificially give to individual enemies, but not to the world SYSTEM. (The word translated "world" is kosmos (adorning), not aeon(age).) So the 1st John passage is aimed at Christians who are TOO enmeshed in the things of the world, but does not say you can't like anything in the world. (1 Cor.7:33 calls marriage and its responsibilities "things of the world", but we are not to shun that are we?)

Now, James 4:4 does tell us not to be "friends" of the world, and friend and friendship are forms of phileo, but the context is talking about wanting the things of the world so much that it causes conflict with others, especially the brethren. So as with 1 John, it is telling us not to put the world before the church, or let it cause you to offend people.

Finally, there is Rom.12:2--"be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind". (this time "world" is translated from "age".) The word conform means "to fashion alike", or conform to the same pattern. So this is not talking about anything as superficial as the sound of the music (unless it is really crosses a certain line, such as acid rock). It is talking about our basic philosophy and general direction in life (the true meaning of "new song"), as well as our behavior as far as the explicit commands of God are concerned.

 

[fwbbcflames]

DHK,

Great post! I am student at Bible College who is most likely going to be a home missionary. Just reminded me of how little I really trust God. I know this is not the topic of discussion here, but God spoke to me through what you wrote. Just wanted to let you know, don't really know why. I just felt led to do so.