Music in Fundamental Churches

[thegospelgeek]

Some music has melody as its dominant component, and is, therefore, melody-based.

Some music has harmony as its dominant component, and is, therefore, harmony-based.

And some music has rhythm as its dominant component, and is, therefore, rhythm-based.

Agreed

Melody-based music feeds the spiritual side of our being most, our mind less, and our flesh even less.

Harmony-based music feeds the mind most, the spiritual, not so much, but the flesh more than melody-based music does.

Rhythm-based music feeds the flesh first and foremost, the mind to a small degree, and the spiritual side of our makeup starves and grows weak.

I need evidence to accept this, biblical or otherwise. At least in the case of myself, I do NOT find this to be true.

 

[Todd W. White]

lease - just proceed. You are dealing with brothers and sisters in Christ. Are you not going to provide your evidence unless every individual here agrees to your conditions? Your Bible defence of the position will silence all the critics.

Will do, Roger - but give me a bit to do so. I'm about to go visit a lady in the hospital, then others, then come back and finish preparations for tonight's service.

I will try to post the first part of my "evidence" together tomorrow.

Blessings.

 

[Dale-c]

Will do, Roger - but give me a bit to do so. I'm about to go visit a lady in the hospital, then others, then come back and finish preparations for tonight's service.

I will try to post the first part of my "evidence" together tomorrow.

Excellent Todd. I look forward to your post.

 

[rbell]

You're reacting to my post, not listening to it - you quote me where I state that I am NOT talking about anyone here, then turn right around and blast me as though I did so. You did the same thing with nearly everything else I said, trying to make it sound as if I said things I specifically did not say.

Sorry Mr. White, but you haven't been "blasted," and this is a discussion forum. We discuss. You are invited to join.

Let's get back to the three questions:

1. Will you approach this discussion with an open heart? Is your heart's desire to allow Christ to be in control of every part of your life?

2. Would you be willing to accept as valid any teaching that is confirmed by sound, Bible exegesis, even if it conflicts with your current beliefs and/or practice?

3. If you find it to be correct, would you be willing to change your mind - and your practice - regarding the subject and follow what God teaches you?

If we can agree, then I will be most happy to proceed and provide the evidence so many think doesn't exist to support Dr. Garlock's - and my - position.

These questions are good ones, and hopefully we all have the spiritual maturity to respond in the affirmative. However, they also apply to you as well.

 

[annsni]

No. But you can't quote me one verse that explicitly states that it is wrong to drive your car over the speed limit, either, but that doesn't mean it's OK to speed!

Hebrews 13:17 "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority."

Sister Ann,

I wasn't trying to toot my own horn - I was trying to establish a basis on which to speak to the issue. I'm not out to "beat" anyone else with my credentials, not am I trying to assert that I am the only person qualified to speak on the issue. Why are you being so defensive? I have not attacked your husband, or anyone else, for that matter...

Not trying to toot your own horn? Then why state your "qualifications" and saying that many do not understand music? I'm stating that you are not the only one who has "qualifications".

 

[Todd W. White]

rebell -

That's why I stated, immediately prior to posting them, the following:

With that, I pose three questions for all of us, including myself, to answer before I spend a lot of time on this -

(emphasis added - TWW)

Sister Ann,

I wrote -

"No. But you can't quote me one verse that explicitly states that it is wrong to drive your car over the speed limit, either, but that doesn't mean it's OK to speed!"

To which you replied:

"Hebrews 13:17 'Obey your leaders and submit to their authority.'"

You're proving my point - it says nothing about cars, highways, speed limits, etc., but it does give us a principle that applies to them.

Sorry you're missing my intent.


Gotta run now.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Folks - I am sensing some stained emotions already. I really would like to see mature believers discuss this in a God honouring manner.

Remember the topic, it is not CCM or worship styles. Is is simply the harmony/melody/rhythm philosophy described in the OP. The question is not even if this is concept worth considering, but if the philosophy has a Bible basis.

Todd has promised to do so tomorrow - may I suggest and request (not enforce) a moratorium until then?

 

[rbell]

I'm about to go visit a lady in the hospital, then others, then come back and finish preparations for tonight's service.

Have a blessed day ministering.

 

[SBCPreacher]

Changed my mind. I'll wait to see what is said.

 

[swaimj]

"Hebrews 13:17 'Obey your leaders and submit to their authority.'"

You're proving my point - it says nothing about cars, highways, speed limits, etc., but it does give us a principle that applies to them.

Sorry you're missing my intent.

The beauty of what Annsi said is that it is so simple and clear. The Bible does NOT say "don't break the speed limit" but this verse applies to the question in a crystally clear way. The problem with making the rhythm of music a moral absolute is that the scriptures say nothing about it nor is there a clear biblical principle that leads us to that conclusion. Todd White, I am open to evidence and persuasion, so I will read what you say with open heart and mind, but in my experience, the arguments for your position are neither simple nor clear.

 

[Pastor Larry]

This argument fails when you consider the unbeliever has a different measure of morality that the Bible has.

To the unbeliever, many things are wrong that the bible says are right.

Yes, but many things are right are agreed upon by both unbeliever and believer. At this point, I am not taking a position on the argument itself. I am pointing out that "Unbeliever said it so it must be wrong" is a bad argument.

There is no law of God written on the heart of man or in the Bible that says that music with heavy rhythm is sinful.

You could be wrong on this. You have concluded that it is not sinful, but you may have misunderstood the Bible, or your conscience may be badly trained.

...until someone can find scriptural evidence for something, it is just a personal opinion.

What scriptural evidence do you have for this? I know of nothing that relegates everything "without scriptural evidence" to the realm of opinion. Which means that this proposition is self-defeating.

What seems common sense to one man is foolishness.

Which may be because of a badly trained conscience, a lack of teaching, a lack of common sense, etc. In other words, there are any number of reasons why this may be so, none of which mean that the man with "common sense" is wrong.

Garlock has his opinion, I have mine.

Which isn't really the point. If Garlock's arguments are wrong, or incomplete, that still doesn't mean that his conclusion is wrong. Again, this is about method of argumentation.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Again, this is about method of argumentation.

Sorry, but this particular thread is about a Bible basis for the philosophy. We are not arguing about the conclusion, but about the Bible basis. If there is none that does not mean the conclusion is wrong, just that it has no Biblical support.

 

[swaimj]

If there is none that does not mean the conclusion is wrong, just that it has no Biblical support.

Roger, I appreciate your raising this topic and I appreciate your guidance at keeping it on topic. Gotta disagree with the above though. While it is true that there are many facts that are true, yet cannot be found in the Bible, Garlock & Co have made their position on music a moral absolute and a primary reason for divisions in churches and within associations. I think you could declare a fact to be true without any support from scripture. I do not think you can declare a moral absolute that is binding upon all Christians without either a direct biblical statement or a principle. I cannot think of an exception to this in any other area of Christian belief.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Roger, I appreciate your raising this topic and I appreciate your guidance at keeping it on topic. Gotta disagree with the above though. While it is true that there are many facts that are true, yet cannot be found in the Bible, Garlock & Co have made their position on music a moral absolute and a primary reason for divisions in churches and within associations. I think you could declare a fact to be true without any support from scripture. I do not think you can declare a moral absolute that is binding upon all Christians without either a direct biblical statement or a principle. I cannot think of an exception to this in any other area of Christian belief.

I see your point - my statement was simply that this may be fact. I am not defending it becoming a standard of fundamentalism or a moral absolute.

Perhaps at some later point we could discuss if there is any factual support for this particular philosophy.

 

[Revmitchell]

Another thread broached this fascinating topic. I am not posting this in the music ministry forum because I would like to see the discussion limited to Fundamentalist Baptists.

I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist. My msic style is very conservative. Saying that, I am not bound to the major IFB music centres or ministries.

I am well aware of Dr Garlock's philosophy of music listed below. I do not want nor will I as moderator allow any kind of attack on Dr Garlock in this thread.

I heard these same things at one of his seminars.



I am mostly interested in a proper discussion of the last point. Does the Bible specifically teach that rhythm based music feeds the flesh? Does the Bible teach that rhythm based music causes our spiritual side to starve and grow weak? What Bible basis do we have for that argument?

Lets stick to a Bible discussion and leave the emotions out.

In college intro to church music class I had to sit through 6 hours of some yahoo reaching farther than Al Gore on climate change trying to prove the back beat was evil and contrary to the Bible. Scripture no where actually speaks to this.

Our motivation for worship will be an extension of our current heart condition and not a result of a certain type of music.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Sorry, but this particular thread is about a Bible basis for the philosophy. We are not arguing about the conclusion, but about the Bible basis. If there is none that does not mean the conclusion is wrong, just that it has no Biblical support.

People here are saying there is no biblical basis for the philosophy because of the method of argumentation used (e.g., "I can't the body/soul/spirit teaching in the Bible and therefore all music is acceptable").

Furthermore, the lack of a direct biblical statement does not mean that something has no Bible basis.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I think you could declare a fact to be true without any support from scripture. I do not think you can declare a moral absolute that is binding upon all Christians without either a direct biblical statement or a principle.

On what biblical basis do you proclaim this?

You should as well remember that many biblical principles have been offered in support of the idea that music is moral. You might disagree with the principle or the use of it, but that might be because you are wrong, not them.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

People here are saying there is no biblical basis for the philosophy because of the method of argumentation used (e.g., "I can't the body/soul/spirit teaching in the Bible and therefore all music is acceptable").

Furthermore, the lack of a direct biblical statement does not mean that something has no Bible basis.

Thats why I am suggesting we wait to see what Todd post before fighting over it.

 

[swaimj]

I do not think you can declare a moral absolute that is binding upon all Christians without either a direct biblical statement or a principle. I cannot think of an exception to this in any other area of Christian belief.

First, I wouldn't consider this a declaration since I said "I think". Second, you left out the last sentence of my statement in which I cannot think of an exception to my statement. There may be an exception to my statement. There may be a moral absolute that I can not find in scripture either by statement or principle, but I don't know of one. If you think of one, let me know. If not, I will continue to think what I currently think because I know of no exception to what I said.

 

[sag38]

I'm waiting to see the Biblical evidence. I wonder if we will hear about Satan once being heaven's choir master?