New Youth Conference for fundamentalist!

His participation with Jack Hayford, Greg Laurie, and a host of others.

Yes, absolutely. God has given everything necessary for life and godliness, as well as everything necessary for every good work. I think the JM's of this world are certainly included.

No, I already made that clear.

I don't think JM is the enemy. I already answered that. In the words of Paul, we are to separate from him but admonish him as a brother.

 

Pardon me for my edgy tone. Perhaps I'm a bit worked up.

It comes back to issues like music. Don't send your students to Masters because they have icky music. UNGODLY MUSIC! ROCK MUSIC! etc. Who cares if their theology department may be the best around, who cares if they are developing young people who love God and have a compassion for the lost. Just so long as their music is like mine.

This is that lock-step denominational machine called fundamentalism. DON'T YOU DARE STEP OVER THE LINE OR YOU'LL HEAR FROM US! Get your hair cut, get your tie on, get your music from SoundForth, and GET AWAY FROM MACARTHUR!

I must admit, I'm a little agitated today.

 

Music ultimately cannot be separated from theology. The best theology department around should have an impact on the music. That does not mean they need to lock step with BJU, or NBBC, or MBBC, or anyone else. It simply means taht there is a relation.

Fundamentalism is really a non-denominational issues. I think your characterization is misguided and unfair. You seem very judgmental towards those who don't agree with your position. Isn't that what you are criticizing the fundamentalists for doing? How is that consistent?

Confess it ... Turn from it ... Get over it ...

 

Pastor Larry,

Just for my review. What verse do you use when you say that John MacArthur is participating in "known and vital error" by speaking on the same set of wooden planks as Jack Hayford or Greg Laurie?

 

Agreed that "young fundamentalists" can be every bit as inflamatory as anyone else. I confess and will work on it.

However, I believe my characterization is pretty close to what I observe. We just have our euphamisms for our denominationalism. We call it, "ministering to our constituency." But if you look at the pressure being exherted against ministries for decisions they make as a local assembly it's exactly this. Look for example at Faith Baptist in Lafayette, IN (you know, the Nouthetic Counseling people). They were once in the good graces of the machine, but when they "loosened" up on some of their music they were first admonished, and now they're close to being blackballed.

Since we're on that topic. I find it interesting that they had people like Jay Adams and Paul Tripp to speak on counseling and fundamentalists flocked to their conference. People were singing the PRAISES of N.A.N.C, but they have been on the "outs" ever since their music slipped.

Let's face it. We have our own congress of fundamentalists who meet to determine issues like if we can or cannot use the NASB. And these men are rarely pastors but college presidents, professors, etc. It's denominationalism!

 

What is there to review? I have defended that ad nauseum in here. It has nothing to do wiht the "same set of wooden planks." That type of response shows an uncritical acceptance of the caricature that you have embraced. The issue is very clearly that MacArthur has spoken in support of these men and men like them. That is unconscionable when these have are clearly in violation of God's word in things that are not matters of conscience but rather matters of revelation. Please don't continue to embrace this caricature that you now hold.

 

My experience is quite different to a large degree. I don't deny that there is perhaps a veritable popedom in some circles.

I don't know much about Faith in Lafayette, but my understanding was that the issues involved were different than music. But I don't know that much about it. I don't keep track of it.

As far as a congress determining Bible versions and the like, I totally reject that. I know fundamentalists more separated than I who use the NIV. I think pastors are making the decisions based on what they have learned, but I don't think that there is a great pressure on them to use any particular practice. Music, like some others issues, is an issue of direction ... an indication of what might be going on. But I can't comment much on Faith since I don't know.

 

Pastor Larry,

Where is "in here"? I haven't read any of your writings before. So just give me the key verse that you would use.

What do you mean by "uncritical acceptance of the caricature?" That is a new one to me.

 

On second thought...don't worry about it Pastor Larry. I don't think I am going to convince that you are wrong.

And quite frankly, I am not peering in on this thread to figure out how to do it right.

I've seen your side of the fence. And you know how they say the grass isn't greener on the other side of the fence? Well, they lied!

 

Pastor Larry,

Hang in there. You are absolutely right. I believe the movement to convert traditional fundamentalism into "neo-fundamentalism" is the most dangerous threat facing the bride of Christ. The church is being attacked on two internal fronts: 1) so-called "second degree separation" and 2) the music used in worship.

While I'm on the topic of music please allow me to share the Scripture that I believe answers the question of musical "style" once and for all. Please follow this link to my church's website and read my article entitled "The Beauty of Holiness": The Beauty of Holiness

There are two ways of applying the timeless teachings of the Scriptures to our lives today. The first is to make rules. This is what has given the Fundamentalists the monicker "Legalist". The second is to derrive timeless principles. Timeless principles can be applied to any culture or time period (present or future) to answer ANY question about what pleases God. The link above is a "timeless principle" approach to answering the question, "What kind of music should be used in worship."

I STRONGLY URGE EVERY PASTOR TO READ THIS ARTICLE.

 

Sponge Bob and HappyG, you have taken what I have written out of context. I never so much as made an inference that the men who will be attending this conference are not feasting on the meat of the Word. Please reread my post. If you will read carefully, you will discover that the reason I brought up the fact of Paul's concerns with those who consume milk was to give support to the fact that most people aren't going to care or even be able to care about these issues that we are discussing. It was in reference to the unsaved, new and weak Christians, not to you or to these men or to evangelicals in general. It was information supporting the fact that even though this is true, it isn't legitimate complaint against the discussion of these matters, because they are still important even though they are meat issues. I NEVER inferred that the men in discussion (evangelical, youth leaders attending the conference,you...)are not eating the meat of the Word. I wrote that this whole issue is a meat kind of issue, and that many of the youth leaders have not had the opportunity to "chew through the MEAT OF THE ISSUE" yet, and many haven't even been given a viable opportunity to do so because of the lack of solid presentation. Your miscontruing comes from the fact that you really don't have the questions in your mind that you are posing. You aren't listening, because you've already decided you know the answers. And that is fine, but be honest about it and don't pretend otherwise. This may not be your intention, but you are most ungracious with those who do not share your viewpoint.

 

That is a reasonably good exegesis of what is going on in that Passage, but it by no means solves the problem of what specific musical choices are to be made these days. I can think of plenty of music that would be from the CCM "Movement" that would not fit the criteria you lay out for disqualification, and music by Soundfourth and the Wilds that in its strict musical form (performance is really where the distinction lies, a fact born out clearly by the passage you reference) IMO copies the style of wordly artists as much or more than some CCM artists. The principles you address are absolutely part of the music selection process, but still leave us with several gray areas where the line cannot be drawn dogmatically.

 

Sponge Bob and HappyG, I just read through my last post and it doesn't sound good. I wrote too quickly and would have edited if I hadn't taken time to read through the entire thread first. Anyway, I really am sorry.

 

SuperDave,

The principl is this: "God does not want to be worshipped in the same manner that the world worships its gods." If we agree together that the gods of our society are the lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, and the pride of life, then we have to conclude that the popular music of our culture represents the direct worship of these "gods".

Is the application of Biblical principles subjective? Absolutely! Is some praise and worship music "gray"? Yes. The concern regarding music that I've seen on this topic has been directly related to Grace Community Church. I encourage you to go to their website and visit their highschool ministry page ("Oneighty"). There is nothing "gray" about the music they use. It sounds just the same as the music of the world.

If you agree with my exegesis of Ex. 20 and 32, then you must agree that Grace Community Church is in direct violation of the second commandment. This is no light matter. Notice in particular that the second commandment is the only one followed with a direct mention of sever judgment.

Gentlemen, we must take a stand on the Word of God. Psalm 29:2 "...worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness" - distinctly unique; not common or profane.

In regards to the "God Focused Youth Ministry" conference I have personally written letters to both Dr. Ollila, whom I know personally, as well as Positive Action for Christ - an organization with which I am chartered. I have requested that Dr. Ollila withdraw his name from the conference, and I have formally withdrawn my endorsement of Positive Action.

 

By the way...

I have a hard time with the name of their teen ministry - "Oneighty" (180). It implies that they are teaching teens to live a separated life that is 180 degrees opposite of the world. However, when I look at their website and listen to their music all I see and hear is the world! If I sat down and talked with them I might give them 25 degrees or maybe 35, but NOT 180!

 

Our Church uses a similar concept. The verse is about Turning from idols to serve the true God. While the music is different entirely from what is being used at GCC, The timeless principles are the same.

I totally understand where you are coming from on this, but many times our analysis of behavior and standards is based much more on our own experience and indoctrination, rather than being based on proper exegesis and application.

I did check out their website, having some flash issues, but the music played just fine. Is it what I would choose to represent my ministry, no, did it conjure up images of satan worship or rampant sin in my mind, no. Even were I to analyze it more thoroughly and agree that it is innapropriate for what they are trying to accomplish, it really has little to do with whether Rick Holland is a fundamentalist.

BTW, Welcome to the Baptist Bored

 

It isn't built on just one verse. I would encourage you to read Pickering's book, particularly his section on so-called "secondary separation" (which name I and some others reject). He lays out the biblical principles involved. IT is not a proof text type issue. I have mentioned these principles in several places in this thread, as well as many times over my 12 and 1/2 thousand posts in this forum.

This idea that sharing wooden planks is germane at all. That reveals a caricature that is not based on either diligent study of the Scripture or knowledge of what fundamentalists base their position on.

Probably not, especially when you don't present biblical arguments and don't refute mine ..

It wouldn't hurt you to learn what is being said though.

Greener grass sometimes is an illusion and sometimes involves the use of things that we shouldn't mention in public. But you probably get the picture ...

 

Thanks for the welcome, superdave!

I do not believe it is a matter of "innapropriateness" - I believe it is a matter of obedience to the Lord. The fact is, if the music sounds like the music of those whose lifestyle is anti-Christ, then the music is profane, or common, and not appropriate for the holy worship of a holy God.

There is a strong push nowadays to determine whether or not a person is a fundamentalist depending solely on their teaching ministry or written doctrinal statement. The fact is that your worship IS the strongest doctrinal statement you can make! "Your talk talks, and your walk talks, but your walk talks louder than your talk talks!" The way a person worships God says A LOT about who they believe God is. If your worship is common, slovenly, and carnal, then to you God is just "one of the guys". This is why we must "Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness" (Ps. 29:2).

I believe I can objectively say that some of the music used in worship at GCC is "LIKE" (similar to) the music that our culture uses to worship its "gods". This is sin.

Regarding Satan worship... the purest form of Satan worship is self worship. Every Biblical instance of personal temptation by Satan was a direct temptation for the individual to give in to the lusts of the flesh, lusts of the eyes, and the pride of life (see both stories of the temptations of Eve and Christ). Satan wants nothing more than for individuals to put their own desires first. Selfishness is the root of all sin, and selfishness is the number one way to bring honor and glory to Satan - the "King of Selfishness" (I...I...I...).

 

Correction... Please replace the phrase at the beginning of my last post with:

"...if the music sounds like the music of those who promote a lifestyle that is anti-Christ..."

 

Pastor Shore, I have wrestled and wrestled (as most guys in our circles have) with the music issue. I have concluded that it is arrogant of me to define what is and what is not right or wrong. You stand in judgement of GCC's worship by defining their music as worldly and making no room for them to discern. You do NOT know their motives.

Your argument is based on the Garlockian, Bob Jones philosophy which defines right and wrong music based on extra-biblical evidence.

You sound quite arrogant in how you have chosen to "withdraw your endorsement" of ProTeens. I realize that you are genuine in your belief that this is an issue of holiness (which explains your black and white, "dig-in-your-heels" position), but you CANNOT draw the line. But, since you seem to have it figured out, I would like for you to post your list of approved music. I'd like to know exactly where to draw the line? Please post this.

If you acknowledge there is gray out there, then please let me know where the edge of that gray is that turns into black.

I remember coming home after my Freshman year BLASTING my parents for some of their music. Boy was I cocky. Anything that wasn't approved at my college wasn't approved anywhere! I was taught in college from this Garlock position. Fifteen years later I have been challenged by godly men (men YOU would know Jonathan, men YOU would say are pillars in our "movement") to think through this. I have had to realize that this is a "meat offered to idols" issue. I have had to repent of my arrogance and ask forgiveness of numerous people.

I'm sure you think you have it all figured out Jonathan. I'm not asking you to change your personal standards, but I am asking you to be VERY careful about your criticisms of other ministries.

Your argument from Scripture will not hold up. You are doing some cultural gymnastics with it, and imposing what you have been indoctrinated with onto the issue.

I was visiting with some older folks in our church some time back and they expressed a STRONG concern about singing from the WILDS chorus book on Sunday evenings. They believe it is contemporary and wrong. They are very sincere and truly believe this in their hearts. Maybe they have it figured out Jonathan and should castigate you and separate from you.