Oh no! It's MODERN!

[Gina B]

Modern worship.

Modern music.

Modern clothes.

Modern technology.

Modern art.

Modern design.

I often hear of the evils of anything modern. If it isn't at LEAST 20 years old, it's eeeeeevvvvvvviiiiiillllll.

Why? It was modern 20 years ago. It was modern 50 years ago.

When does it quit being modern and start being ok?

And what on earth is wrong with things being modern anyhow? Why do we all have to look and sound like our grandparents to be okay? Wouldn't it be even BETTER it we were like our great grandparents...or our great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandparents?

Someone 'splain this whole modern enigma please.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Because people confuse traditions of men with Biblical mandates.

They confuse longevity of practices with meaningful practices. The more steeped in tradition a practice is - the more spiritual it MUST be.

Organs are really spiritual because they've been around so long in the church. But guitars?!?!?!

They've got to be EBIL! We just ain't neber dun that in our church!!

 

[exscentric]

And noone gets an opinion cept you. I got it.:wavey:

So what's the matter with what I like?

So what's the matter with old things that still work?

So what's the matter with traditions? There is Easter, there is Christmas there is ......

So what's the matter with others liking what they like? :thumbs:

I really dislike this new (modern) post

 

[Mexdeaf]

For some reason this song came to mind:

I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical;

:laugh:

 

[Tater77]

The old red hymnal gives me a cold chills just thinking about it. I love modern praise and worship music and I haven't looked back since. Even my kids just walk around the house humming and singing the songs. Lets see the old red hymnal do that one.

My old old Church is a small missionary Baptist Church with less than 100 people. They refused to update anything in any way. Average attendance is 25 on Sunday and no one has been Baptized in about 5 years. So their stubbornness became a stumbling block.

 

[Mexdeaf]

It all went to pot when we allowed electricity to come into the church. Think about it-

If there wasn't any electricity, then the women wouldn't wear pants to church "because it's too cold during the service."

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any of that cursed P&W or CCM.

If there wasn't any electricity, the lazy pastors would actually have to preach instead of using that new-fangled PowerPoint stuff that surely is of the devil who is the author of confusion.

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any computers in the church office so the pastor wouldn't be on the BaptistBoard getting all these evil, modern notions about using modern versions instead of the KJV.

And I could go on, but the deacons just voted to cut off the

 

[Dale-c]

So what's the matter with what I like?

So what's the matter with old things that still work?

No one said anything was wrong with what you like.

The point of the OP is when people make tradition a doctrine.
By the way, I would say "new doctrine" is wrong. The faith was once delivered and "new doctrine" is wrong.
However, things such as music are not wrong just because they are new.
Many old and new songs are weak theologically but that is the case with a particular song no matter how old it is.

 

[Johnv]

When does it quit being modern and start being ok?

As soon as something else comes in to replace it.

And what on earth is wrong with things being modern anyhow?

Being modern is not in and of itself an enathema. Modern is whatever is current. That which is modern eventually no longer going to be modern at one point or another.

 

[exscentric]

"No one said anything was wrong with what you like."

Oh I think the implication in the thread is clear that modern is in and old is wrong, but then that MIGHT be true at times.

"The point of the OP is when people make tradition a doctrine."

Doubt anyone liking traditional music would say that it is doctrine, only those that need an arguement against it would.

"By the way, I would say "new doctrine" is wrong. The faith was once delivered and "new doctrine" is wrong."

Well for the most part yes, but allow for new teaching from the word that corrects old incorrect teaching of the word.

"However, things such as music are not wrong just because they are new."

Correct but things like music are not wrong just because they are old.

"Many old and new songs are weak theologically but that is the case with a particular song no matter how old it is."

Correct.

 

[abcgrad94]

"There is nothing new under the sun." So, "modern" doesn't really mean new, it just means "different from what we're used to doing." Which equals CHANGE, and we all know that CHANGE is a dirty word in church.

I would love to do away with Sunday School and do something else instead, like an evening Bible study, but that ain't gonna happen as long as I'm IFB. I'd be burned at the stake as a heretic for suggesting it!

It doesn't matter if we use the organ or guitar, an overhead projector or powerpoint, hymns or songs of praise, as long as GOD gets the glory and it pleases him.

 

[Mexdeaf]

"There is nothing new under the sun." So, "modern" doesn't really mean new, it just means "different from what we're used to doing." Which equals CHANGE, and we all know that CHANGE is a dirty word in church.

I would love to do away with Sunday School and do something else instead, like an evening Bible study, but that ain't gonna happen as long as I'm IFB. I'd be burned at the stake as a heretic for suggesting it!

It doesn't matter if we use the organ or guitar, an overhead projector or powerpoint, hymns or songs of praise, as long as GOD gets the glory and it pleases him.

WAIT A MINNIT!!! If it doesn't please (insert your favorite preacher or "group" here), it can't please God! Or can it???

 

[Gina B]

"No one said anything was wrong with what you like."

Oh I think the implication in the thread is clear that modern is in and old is wrong, but then that MIGHT be true at times.

Well, I made the opening post and the implication is NOT clear that modern is in and old is wrong, because I love the old fashioned almost everything, and also love the modern stuff.
I'm glad to be in a church that incorporates both.

The implication that DOES exist is exactly as was stated by Dale C.
Thank you Dale.

 

[Scarlett O.]

I love my blended church service.

We may sing from the Broadman hymnal (which I LOVE!) or we may sing a song from the current Christian radio station.

We may sing without instruments, piano only, recorded only, or praise band.

It's about the exaltation of the LORD and not the preference of the exalters.

 

[Gina B]

It all went to pot when we allowed electricity to come into the church. Think about it-

If there wasn't any electricity, then the women wouldn't wear pants to church "because it's too cold during the service."

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any of that cursed P&W or CCM.

If there wasn't any electricity, the lazy pastors would actually have to preach instead of using that new-fangled PowerPoint stuff that surely is of the devil who is the author of confusion.

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any computers in the church office so the pastor wouldn't be on the BaptistBoard getting all these evil, modern notions about using modern versions instead of the KJV.

And I could go on, but the deacons just voted to cut off the

You are too funny!

 

[Dale-c]

I will say there is an equal and opposite problem in some churches of "old is bad" at least in practice.

However many, many churches make a doctrine out of their music preferences. Many.

 

[exscentric]

"CHANGE is a dirty word in church."

No, not at all, it is more the method and the change for change sake that is often the dirty.

"Well, I made the opening post and the implication is NOT clear that modern is in and old is wrong,"

And I did not say that you said it was.

To the actual point of the original question I would suggest for possible consideration:

The world is in a terrible mess most of the time, full of change and one of the "safe" places for a believer to go where they feel comfortable is church. To upset that as well is not being responsive to the believers.

However, change is easy, well easier, if reason for change is given, if the change is logical and worthwhile. Change that is abrupt and/or forced is going to be resisted.

I have seen contemp. music eased into a church with no problems at all, and I have seen it changed overnight with no input from the congregation and resistance is massive. I use music since it is one of the items raised, my thoughts relate to any change that comes along.

"Old" is not best but until it is shown that "new" is better it is not going to be well accepted.

 

[Refreshed]

When it comes to change in the church, we must check our motive for the change. If the change is because "enter famous author/preacher/guru here" said we should do it in his book, then that is not a proper motive for change.

If our motive for change in the church is because we are fulfilling our own preferences, then that is not a proper motive for change.

If our motive for change in the church is to draw a crowd to our services that wouldn't otherwise come, then that is not the proper motive for change.

The only proper motive for change is that it would please the Head of the church, Jesus Christ. It comes down to this. If we are using worldly methods to draw the world into our church, then we are not fulfilling our Biblical mandate. If all we have to offer the world is more of what the world wants, just wrapped in a veneer of Christianity, then we are doing them a disservice. Why do we want change in our churches? When we can discover the motive behind the change is to conform our church to God's will, then we can change.

 

[just-want-peace]

It all went to pot when we allowed electricity to come into the church. Think about it-

If there wasn't any electricity, then the women wouldn't wear pants to church "because it's too cold during the service."

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any of that cursed P&W or CCM.

If there wasn't any electricity, the lazy pastors would actually have to preach instead of using that new-fangled PowerPoint stuff that surely is of the devil who is the author of confusion.

If there wasn't any electricity, there wouldn't be any computers in the church office so the pastor wouldn't be on the BaptistBoard getting all these evil, modern notions about using modern versions instead of the KJV.

And I could go on, but the deacons just voted to cut off the

Now I'm all in favor of this!!! :tongue3:

After all, no electricity = no speakers, no electric guitars, in short a quieter atmosphere. Now this is change I can accept muy rapidido!!:laugh:

Exscentric sez:

However, change is easy, well easier, if reason for change is given, if the change is logical and worthwhile. Change that is abrupt and/or forced is going to be resisted.

On a serious note, this is most emphatically true, AND too many times the exact opposite of what is actually done.

edited to add:

Refreshed sez:

The only proper motive for change is that it would please the Head of the church, Jesus Christ. It comes down to this. If we are using worldly methods to draw the world into our church, then we are not fulfilling our Biblical mandate. If all we have to offer the world is more of what the world wants, just wrapped in a veneer of Christianity, then we are doing them a disservice. Why do we want change in our churches? When we can discover the motive behind the change is to conform our church to God's will, then we can change.

Very good point!!!!!!!!

 

[abcgrad94]

However, change is easy, well easier, if reason for change is given, if the change is logical and worthwhile. Change that is abrupt and/or forced is going to be resisted.

"Old" is not best but until it is shown that "new" is better it is not going to be well accepted.

True, that. I think that so often we've done things a certain way for so many years, that things become "sacred cow" even when valid points are made for the change. If a program, such as Sunday School, Ladies' Circle, etc. isn't working, we should scrap it, not judge people as carnal or ungodly because they aren't interested.

For example, our ladies circle group is BORING. We eat, have a very boring devotional (usually read word for word out of a book or pamphlet) then we proceed to read word for word every single missionary letter the church has recieved in the last month (whether the church financially supports them or not, we still have to read them) and pray for them. Guess what? The younger women don't want to waste three hours away from their families doing this. But, heaven help if you try to change it in any way. So, what should be done for the glory of God becomes an occasion for the older women to judge the younger women for not being as "committed to church" as they should be.

I think this is one reason why there is such a generation gap between the "old" IFB and the "younger" ones. Methods that worked 50 years ago don't interest this generation but the older folks cling to the past and refuse to embrace the present.

 

[Salty]

I think you should be banned from BB for even suggesting it :tonofbricks: :smilewinkgrin: :tongue3: