RE: Contemporary Christian Music....

Hello Molly,

I fully agree with everything you have said, nice to see another Reformed Baptist in the music forum.

God Bless

Enda

 

Terry,

I also apologise if I have misunderstood you in any way.

As I said I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of CCM in the church, suffice to say I agree with the comments made by Molly and Preacher Nathan Knight above.

Anyway, I think we've cleared up the point I was trying to make, so I'll leave you to continue the discussion with Molly and PNK.

God Bless

Enda
PS It wasn't the spelling mistake that bothered me, it was the fact that you had me down as a woman

 

lets be clear on this!!!
are you saying you're not a woman?



PS I am a woman....a mom of two.

 

Su Wei,

I hope you're not too shocked but yes, the last time I checked I was a man.

Enda is actually a gaelic name, I am called after the Irish Saint Enda of the Arran Isles.

Its not a very common name even here in Ireland so I have gotten used to people thinking it is Edna

God Bless

Enda not Edna (Maybe I need to sign all my posts like this )

 

While it certainly is true that anyone can go down to an altar and not really give their hearts to Christ, still is the deciding factor in the assumption that most today fall into this category the style of music and translation? Should we use old music and translations just to make things "hard", as if salvation is is "hard believism"?
There were probably just as many in the past who fell into this category, and the traditional music and Bible all the more made them feel they were doing good (compare to the 'godless', the 'sensual', etc), and it was "easy" for them as well.
Yes, easy believism is a danger, but let's not tie it to music and translations, as if older is always God's particular way just because it is old.

 

Enda!

I'm laughing here!!!
Whadda mixup!

THousand apologies!!! (That's from Mind your Language.... if you're familiar.)

I guess your gentleness and coureous disposition just sealed in my mind that i was talking to another lady!!! (Not that men are not courteous, mind you! )

Glad to meet you, again, Enda!

 

Su Wei, Thanks for the nice things you've said about me, I hope I can live up to it in the future.

See you around

Enda

PS Yes I used to watch 'Mind Your Language' when I was young. Wouldn't be very politically correct these days.

 

I am convinced that CCM so called is not of God, but of the world. There was a time when as a young convert I used to buy tapes and listen to what may be labeled as CCM. It was not English, but CCM nevertheless. I thought it was "the thing to do", listening to such music, that is. But after some time I began to be more and more disturbed in my spirit as respected that music, and so I eventually ceased listening to it. It had sort of become an addiction to me also. I never regretted putting it away.

As for CCM and churches I believe true churches of Christ will not tolerate CCM in their services. I come to think about how in England William Huntington and certain others were opposed to the increasing emphasis on music in the services, especially instrumental music. He said it was of the devil, and others with him. If I recall aright his congregation did sing hymns and psalms in the services, but they were opposed to the new thing of bringing in manifold instruments into the meeting house. If such an approach was good enough for Huntington, who was an Independent, and for the old Particular Baptists, then it should be good enough for today's Baptists, if they be of Christ, that is.

About the most beautiful congregational singing I have ever heard was by some Primitive Baptist church in USA. It was non-instrumental, male and female voices mixed in powerful hymn-singing. And the lyrics were Biblical and God-exalting. I happened to come across it on the internet. Such beautiful singing I have never encountered in my country, where all sects and denominations professing Christ have instruments in their services, some more some less.

I think that if some old Baptists like Gill, Kiffin, Knollys etc. were given to visit the earth today they would be shocked at the worldly music posing as "Christian music" amidst the churches who profess to be of Christ.


Harald

 

wow. pretty strong statements here!
But i agree!

 

If one person becomes addicted to CCM (or whatever else), how is it then proven to be no good for anyone/any "true Church"?
And if instruments are the issue, contemporary styles can be sung with less instruments, or even a-capella, so what does that have to do with the spiritual worth of a style?

 

My personal experience with CCM, which I briefly stated, was not given in order to prove anything. It was just that a relation of experience. The other statement I made was not based on my experience but on the sum total of what I know about CCM, worldliness, true Christianity etc.

There are some certain things which show that CCM is not of God but of man and of the enemy of souls. If someone can give a few names of some CCM performers that have "made it big", and their respective statements of faith respecting Christ, salvation, the Trinity etc., then it should not be too difficult to assess what spirit they are of, in the light of what the word of God teaches, Isa. 8:20, 1Tim. 6:3-5, 2John 9-11. What a man professes with his mouth (or pen) is what he believes in his heart. If the heart is full of infidelity the mouth professes heretical beliefs. This I believe is the case with most if not all CCM performers.


Harald

 

Let's see, Harald, you're in to 'conspiracy theories' about George W Bush, and now you're painting with a 'broad-brush' regarding CCM. It is truly amazing that one man has such insight! How on earth would you know what every CCM 'performer' believes? Their are plenty of 'enemies of souls' in this world, Harald. One is called 'bigotry'. Another is 'ignorance'. Another is 'judgementalism'. If one does not like 'instrumental' Christian music, fine. I've actually known people who do not like music! But don't conclude that all CCM is an 'enemy of the soul', simply because you don't 'like it'.

 

According to what little knowledge I possess the type of music called CCM began in the 20th century. Thus it is not part of the faith once delivered, which was delivered in the first century. Some has said its roots is in the charismatic movement. The charismatic movement has yet to show it can produce godly fruit. The charismatic movement is one of the last vomits of the dragon, the old serpent, Satan. CCM is not the same as "instrumental Christian music". CCM is thoroughly worldly music dressing up in "Christian" garbs. It is such a wolfish type of music as compared to Biblical standards that it would be even stupid to say it comes as a wolf in sheep clothing. It is manifestly worldly and carnal, the fruit of deceived souls.

Whatever I may think of David W Cloud I think his book on CCM is one of the most worthwhile and important exposes of this ungodly thing.


Harald

 

I just joined a few days ago, and I may be a little late on this, but.....

There are some songs that supposedly pass for Contemporary Christian, but do not glorify God. But there are a lot of CCM songs out there that do just that. They praise Jesus, lift people up, stir peoples' souls ( I dare anyone to listen to anything Rich Mullins wrote or sung and say that it isn't from God), and do help to bring people to Christ (mostly the younger people, since they are the majority of listeners).

I stated in another post that people are afraid of and tend to criticize anything that is new and different, and unfamiliar. It is a human characteristic.
I would say do more research, let God guide you and give you discernment as to what is and is not of Him.

BTW, only in the last line of "Amazing Grace" is God's name even mentioned. Only in the last line does it say anything about praise. Should we stop singing it?

 

No, just go straight in to that last verse, flubbing the first 4 (3, depending on which song book).

 

No, just go straight in to that last verse, flubbing the first 4 (3, depending on which song book). </font>[/QUOTE]Is that what you do?

 

CCM was around way before the 20th century. The same kind of rhetoric was around when people had the audacity to sing in two parts way, way, back when. The same kind of rhetoric came about with the use of the organ. Even more rhetoric came when Handel had the nerve to use some bar tunes as the music for his work "The Messiah."

The fact that people despise such godly men and women as Steven Curtis Chapman, Steve Green, the members of Caedmon's Call, and so on, places them in the same shoes as the who belabored those who came before these artists in praising God.

 

And neither was whatever you sing in church, whether instrumental or not, or even "traditional".

As Scott just said, at one point in time, when your style was new, people in church said the same things. The first century worship was probably more lively than the somber Platonic sound that came from the medieval church period and much of the Reformation.

 

As for the first century apostolic congregations one may only speculate what kind their congregational singing was, or perhaps reach some conclusion via study of the NT. I recall Paul briefly refers to this in Eph. chapter 5.

As for the Roman Catholic church and its music I do not know much about it, nor do I care at the present. That church is a great harlot even to this day. Nor do I know much about the Reformation era Protestant music. What I am concerned with first and foremost is the kind of singing that was custom in the British Particular Baptist congregations of the 17th and 18th centuries and in the US sister branch, the old Regular Baptists. While I cannot prove it as for now I believe these Baptists were quite near to the original apostolic assemblies in their singing, except for the language of course. If the apostolic congregations used instruments I think they did not use many different kinds at the same time to accompany the singing. My take is that when Jesus Christ and the apostles celebrated the passover they sang a capella, perhaps some psalm of David.


Harald

 

If you admit you don't know (or care) about the first century "kind of singing", then you can't say that 20th century is "worldly", while only your 127th/18th century Particular Baptist style is "the faith once delivered to the saints", because that is making a presumption of knowledge about the first century (when the faith was delivered to the saints).
Your 17th and 18th century style was what I was including in the "medieval" [Catholic] and Reformation style, which all tended to be somber (whether with many, few, or no instruments, which was not so much my argument), because of Platonic influence, and historical evidence suggests the Biblical worship was not like this, so also your 17th/18th century style was not "the faith once delivered to the saints" either.