MMF - Contemporary/band vs hymns/piano in worship service.

Steve,

Thank you for being the first to openly admit that the CCM group must argue from silence. But this is hardly a stalemate.

According to the Scriptures, how must one with "knowledge" respond to the "weaker" brother who has a conscience toward "disputable matters"?

 

Aaron-
Since both sides argue from silence, it could be hardly claimed that either side was the more "knowledgeable" or for that matter, "weaker". God, through His scripture has had no problem clearly defining what we should/not be doing. I wonder if He has allowed us both the freedom to worship in ways that we are comfortable? Yes, there are certain standards for worship and I believe that they are clearly spelled out. However, the Bible doesn't give us an Order of Worship that we are to copy and paste. It's very possible that different congregations worshipped in different ways. You stated in a previous post:

You're right, it doesn't say anything about being creative. However, given the fact that we don't have an exact pattern almost anything that we do could be considered "creative" Boring doesn't mean lack of cheer by the way. It is possible to be joyful (not cheerful) and still find a particular song uninteresting (boring).

Finally, I am unclear as to your exact meaning for the following:

My understanding is that the "stronger" brother is not to become a stumbling block to the "weaker". I take that to mean that the more mature brother should not do what the weaker brother has a conscience toward where there might be a question "disputable matter". What my question is is what does this have to do with this discussion? Are you stating that no one should listen to CCM because it might lead another astray?

Steve

[ March 25, 2002, 09:03 PM: Message edited by: sjd ]

 

"I just wanted to say to Baptistforever that, you should feel God, in music."

Sam,
Can you show me Bibically where we are to "feel God" in music? That is a very scary thing because as it comes across to me is that if we are "feeling" God in music, then we are relying on our feelings on spiritual matters, such as worship.

True, there are some songs that will make goosebumps go up and down your spine, but that doesn't mean that you are "feeling God". You can get sick and have goosebumps.

One of the worst things that we as Christians can do in our faith is to rely on our feelings. We are not always going to feel saved because we are not perfect. Do we feel saved when we sin? I can honestly say that I don't. Do I always feel God in music and when I am worshipping my Lord and Creator? No, and I would be quite frightened if I did.

I do not rely on my feelings because I know that they will not always lead to the truth, in fact, the majority of the time if I were to follow my feelings it would lead to disaster.

Music was not created so that we would "feel God" in and through it. Music was created so that we could fulfill one of the things that we were created for, to praise and magnify our Creator.

Feel God through music..no, experiencing God's grace and growing in Him through worshipping God using the instrument of music.

In Christ's gracious love,
Teresa

 

Well, according to you, there are no clear cut guidelines, so that makes music a disputable matter.

And yes, I am stating that, "no one should listen to CCM because it might lead another astray."

[ March 27, 2002, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Teresa I just wanted to say that I do feel God in song just as I do in church or when I go to Him in pray, ect. Your right that we are not perfect and sometimes I don't feel saved when I have sinned against Him but I am proud to know that He never leaves me. I don't follow my feeling but the feeling I'm given. Your a christian so you should know how it feels when God is present. The feelings I experiance are much deeper than goosebumps. I didn't mean to make you angry but I personaly do not like the contempary style. If you like it then listen to it. I don't have any problems with the instruments. It's just not the type of music I prefer. I just like the feeling of God's presence in the good ole hymns. I wouldn't like to be in a church that the played all contempary just as you probably wouldn't like a church that played church hymns. God made each of us different and therefore don't always agree on everything even though we are christians. But Thank God we did both agree on accepting Him as our Savior. Maybe in heaven we can appreciate each others choise of music better. ~Sheila~

 

Heaven's music will probably be like nothing we've ever heard here...won't it be awesome! And to think that Jesus Christ will be the CHOIR DIRECTOR (Zephanian 3:17--"joy over thee" has indications of leadership in the textual structures/tenses/etc.) Until then, we "limp along" in our attempts to praise Him through music...

 

My style is many different styles. I do not stick to one style because I believe that God has given us more than one style.

I have no problem being in a service with just hymns just as I have no problem being in a service with just contemperary music. I don't care what kind of style the music is, just as long as I am praising my blessed redeemer through it.

Aaron, I do not agree with you. True, I am from a younger generation, but I do understand what one of our purposes here on Earth is. One purpose is to praise and worship God until he comes back.

Are we to say that CCM artists are not praising God? If you say no, can you prove it? I have a tendency to stick to one artist, which is Mark Lowry, and I have yet to see in any of his songs that he is doing anything other than praising God.

True, he does have "non-worshipping" songs, but that is part of another gift God has given some people, humor.

If we are lead astray by CCM, then there has got to be more to the story. If your heart is not right, and you are not in a steady walk with God, the littlest thing can lead you astray. I have yet to believe that CCM can lead anyone astray. If you have evidence, please provide.

In Christ's gracious love,
Teresa

 

>>>>>By the way,we are raising 2 daughters
who we feel very convicted about them learning the great hymns of old,so we are
teaching those at home.<<<<<<<

This is not intended to be critical, but I am 57 years old and I have never heard the word "convicted" used in this way, except recently here in this forum. Is this usage specific to certain groups of Baptists?

 

From Lowry's website:
"The Hebrews were normally quite phobic about adopting the customs of their "pagan" neighbors. The Mosaic laws had 613 rules, many of which spelled out in exact detail how NOT to behave like the nations surrounding them. Rules about diet and dress codes and all kinds of things. But when it came to music, absolutely nothing is forbidden. They used the same musical instruments and styles as anyone else. The only difference is that they used their music to worship the one true God and to celebrate life."
"We now have historical evidence that the Hebrew language grew out of Canaanite dialects. So did their music. They borrowed from their contemporary culture and made it their own."
"The seventies witnessed another shift as Contemporary Christian Music created a genre all its own that paralleled all the styles and sounds of the popular culture. Lots of controversy once again. But as Larry Norman put it: "Why should the devil have all the good music?" At last the pseudo- boundaries of sacred vs. secular music came tumbling down as artist after artist claimed their own unique voice. That genie will never go back into the bottle. It's taken us this long to get back to what the Hebrews knew millenniums ago. "Whatever has breath, praise the Lord!""
Reverend J Music . . .Secular or Sacred? http://www.marklowry.com/flashmain.htm

There is a lot of misinformation posted on Lowry's site, as to the history of music, and the subject of the sacredness of music. The music of the Hebrews was not borrowed from the Canaanites, it was ordered and directed from the Lord. Is this a justification for mixing the profane with the sacred? He gives an interesting history of music, and the slippery sliding slope of music that it has taken to the position where it is today. It has crossed the line. He inadvertently admits this. "Why should the devil have all ?good music'?" The devil doesn't any more, does he? Christians have a whole lot of the devil's music. The sacred and the profane are mixed to the point to where there is no distinction, and Lowry sees no distinction either.
DHK

[ March 28, 2002, 04:01 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

Aaron-
The problem with your statement is that it is extra-Biblical. You cannot state that it is sin for anyone else since you have only your convictions to base your statement on. You may be under conviction not to listen to CCM or any other "rock" music. However, you may be depriving others of the blessings and encouragement similiar to those that you derive from your hymns.

Steve

 

The content of the music (worship) was ordered by God, but not the style, which was the point, and which the Bible is silent on.
The style, like the language would have been shared with the culture. They were ancient mideasterns, not medieval Europeans, as critics assume their music was.

 

The content of the music (worship) was ordered by God, but not the style, which was the point, and which the Bible is silent on.
The style, like the language would have been shared with the culture. They were ancient mideasterns, not medieval Europeans, as critics assume their music was.</font>[/QUOTE]The music of the Hebrews, in style, in content, and in every way was different from the nations around them. God commanded them to be different. he put a difference between the profane and the holy. He called them out to be a people holy unto Himself. They were separated unto God in every way. Their clothing was different. Their diet was different. Their worship was different. The only purpose that music served in the Bible for the Hebrews was for worship. This could hardly be copied from the Canaanites. It was commanded and ordered by God. The style of their music was in no way similar to the Canaanites, except when they copied it in episodes like those in Ex.32:17-19.
DHK

 

Where did God "order and direct" music? As far as I know, there were no direct instructions on worship music. If I'm wrong feel free to correct me. (By the way, the passage that you quote in another post(Exodus 32:17-19) has nothing to do with the music and everything to do with the golden calf.)

It is not the external that makes something profane or sacred, rather the internal. Matthew 15:18-20 states:

Jesus always dealt with the issues of the heart, since the heart is where evil comes from. Therefore you cannot wholesale condemn any one style of music. Condemning a whole musical style begs the question of authorship and content. Each song has to be judged for its content, and by its author. Lest we call all of another style sacred simply because the tempo is slower and the music softer.

Actually, calling what Lowry did a history of music is like calling a handful of chocolate chips a well rounded meal. Lowry's purpose is to make a point, not give a history. He uses historical references to illustrate. Gis information on the Messiah was pretty accurate from the American Handel Society web site:

It's hard to imagine that Handel's work might even be thought of as profane isn't it? The more times change the more they stay the same.

Finally, I did a Google search on the quote "Why should the devil have all the good music'?". It turns out that it is attributed to a least 3 authors (all Christians) Luther, Charles Wesley, and Larry Norman.

Steve

 

"They were separated unto God in every way."

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm glad God decided to then include everyone (us Gentiles) when he sent Jesus here to die for our sins

UNP
Adam

 

&lt; He called them out to be a people holy unto Himself. They were separated unto God in every way. Their clothing was different. Their diet was different. Their worship was different. The only purpose that music served in the Bible for the Hebrews was for worship. This could hardly be copied from the Canaanites. &gt;

Not only is this contention unproved, but using the same logic therein, since NT Christians are not required to have a different diet or different clothing than the people around them, why must music be something completely different either?

 

Consider these facts:
There are more than 730 references to music in the Bible, and all of them have to do with worship.
There is no mention of the drum in the worship of Jehovah or New Testament worship. The drum is only used in the Bible with reference to the worship of idols.
When David used his harp Saul's spirit was comforted and the evil spirit fled.
Don't these facts in themselves speak as to a style of music that is acceptable and a style that is not acceptable? If there are no drums used in the worship of Jehovah, then just maybe the Lord does not put much or any emphasis on the big BEAT, like the world and CCM likes to do.

Consider these verses:
Psalm 33:2 Praise the LORD with harp: sing unto him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings.
3 Sing unto him a new song; play skilfully with a loud noise.
4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.
---Note the NEW SONG in verse three.

(Psa 40:3 KJV) And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD.

(Psa 96:1 KJV) O sing unto the LORD a new song: sing unto the LORD, all the earth.

(Psa 98:1 KJV) O sing unto the LORD a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory.

(Psa 144:9 KJV) I will sing a new song unto thee, O God: upon a psaltery and an instrument of ten strings will I sing praises unto thee.

(Psa 149:1 KJV) Praise ye the LORD. Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints.

(Rev 5:9 KJV) 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;

Right from the Old Testament to the New Testament, the redeemed have been given a "New Song." Over and over again, the Psalmist speaks of the new song in his heart. Sing unto the Lord a new song; not the music of the Canaanites--it was not acceptable; not the music of the Philistines--it was not acceptable; not the music of the Moabites or the Jebusites, or the Syrians, or the Egyptians, or any other country. God had given them their music. He had put a new song in their hearts. It was His praise that was to be sung in the congregation of the saints. This could hardly be a duplication of another nation's music. It was different. It was new.

If your music doesn't change, the style of your music doesn't change, your lifestyle doesn't change, after you trust Christ, then are you really saved? Christ gives us a new song in our hearts? The issue is the world. Our goal is to be more like Christ and less like the world. How does my music conform to what the Bible teaches in Col.3:16 and Eph.5:19, as compared to what the world likes to sing?
DHK

 

The only song acceptable is a new song? That would exclude the very songs [psalms] from which you quoted.

&lt; If your music doesn't change, the style of your music doesn't change, your lifestyle doesn't change, after you trust Christ, then are you really saved? &gt;

If, since the cradle, you have heard and sung Amazing Grace and At the Cross and How Great Thou Art, et al, then what "style of music" must yours be changed to to confirm if you are 'really saved?'

Where do organ and piano come into this, since they, like the drum, are not mentioned in relation to the worship of the Lord? And I notice you did not refer to the timbrel and dancing in Psalm 150. That would certainly be new to many converts today, but I have seldom seen it as a spontaneous reaction to salvation.

[ March 30, 2002, 01:18 AM: Message edited by: ChristianCynic ]