Seeker Sensitive: Is It Biblical?

webdog - You are absolutely correct in that it is a reference to the OT, but it must be read in the context in which it was used by Paul.

And according to the context in Romans there is no one that seeks God. Granted that is while the person is "under sin" which it says in v. 9.

I agree that believers will seek God. We are called to seek God. Johnv is right on the money there.

And unbelievers that are being drawn by the Holy Spirit unto salvation have the ability to seek God.

Outside of that no one seeks after God.

 

I pastor a church that strives to be seeker sensative. We have not bent one single principle in our efforts to make our church a place where lost people will feel comfortable. I'm curious as to what standards you feel are being bent by churches who try to be seeker sensative. [/QB][/QUOTE]

In every seeker service I have been in the music has been worldly and sensuous usually placing the attention on the people singing. The dress has often been sensuous and in my opinion, unsuitable for the house of God. One church was more like a night club instead of a holy place.

In my original post I asked if there is a line that we should not cross in order to reach the lost.

Many arguments have been put forth already. I do believe methods matter. [/QB][/QUOTE]

If the music sounds sensuous to you, maybe it's not the music but your carnal heart. If by worldly you mean it sounds good, we're guilty there, but it is always focused on God and I can't imagine anyone finding it sensuous. If by unsuitable dress you mean jeans, guilty again. But you'll never make me believe that matters to God. At every seeker sensative service I've been at, and that's a lot, all the parts that are supposed to be covered were covered. Honestly, I've seen more low cut, revealing dresses in traditional churches than I've seen revealing casual clothes in one of our services.

If casual services with modern music is not your style, then don't go there. But don't knock it because you don't like it. Judge the tree by its fruit. The fruit of the Gospel is changed lives, and I'll put our fruit up against anybody's, traditional or contemporary. No brag, because it's God who produces the fruit.

 

Well, the personal attack was in response to your attack on our church based on the style we chose. Sorry that offended you, but if you can listen to a song that lifts up the name of Jesus, and because of the beat, or the guitars, or drums, or whatever, you find it to be sensuous, the problem is you, not the song.

So let me answer your question with a question. What will you not do to reach the lost? Personally, If I knew that I could do something and the result would be people coming to a saving faith in Jesus Christ, I'd do it. I think it should be obvious that we don't violate Scripture in what we do, so things like stealing a Bible to give to someone would be off limits. But outside of violating God's commands, no, there is nothing I wouldn't do to reach the lost.

 

guitar, no one attacked your specific church. I don't think anyone claimed to have ever been to your particular church.

There is indeed much music these days that IS sensuous, and it is NOT perceived as such because of some carnality on the listener's part. Thats like a lady saying that she can dress as immodestly as she wants to and its solely the men's carnal minds that are at fault for their lustful thinking.

There are methods we see used in SOME churches today that do indeed use unGodly, unBIblical principles in order to draw the world into their churches. This is just creating worldly churches, for the most part. Churches where the people think they can just live any old way they want to and still be pleasing Christ.

Its not about whether a church has a drum anywhere in sight. I went to a good, very large fundamental church that had a full orchestra playing for every service, including a small set of two drums as part of its percussion section. It was an orchestra though, not a band. Many things can be used wisely, and yet can also be used in an unscriptural manner. The tools aren't necessarily the problem, but rather the way they are used.

Again it comes down to what fundamentalists are so often accused of as promoting....an "easy-belief in Christ." As if there is to be no difference between us as Christians, and the world.

 

You overreacted. He didn't mention your church.

But you have engaged in bad argumentation. The song that you mention may not, because of the beat, the guitars, the drums or whatever, may in fact not lift of hte name of Christ.

And the reason why you are not sensitive to it may reveal a lack of spiritual discernment and sensibility on your part.

Notice how I just made the same argument you did above. I will be willing to bet you will be offended that I accused you of that. The question is, are you offended that you accused someone else of that?

So there are some things you wouldn't do. That's a start in the right direction.

 

so answer my question. What would you not do even if you knew it would reach someone for Christ?

 

Disobey God.

We agree on that. The question is "What disobeys God?" God gives us some clues in the NT as to the means which are appropriate for the communication of the gospel message. And we must critically evaluate modern means to determine if they fit that description. I don't have time to enlarge on that tonight since I am finishing up for tomorrow. But it is a topic worthy of sane and civil discussion.

 

guitarpreacher,

you are insinuating that some things people will not do are the ONLY thing that will reach them for Christ.

I am totally against that reasoning. Some things I would not do is bring the world's music into my church.....and I contend that the world's music does NOT reach people for Christ.....it reaches people for entertainment. If and when some people DO believe on Christ through some song, it is the GOSPEL that has reached that person, not the song. I also say that some assume that the person would never have come to CHrist without that worldly music.....that is an assumption that has no basis in anything we can measure.

The way we reach someone for Christ is by going out and telling them the gospel.

 

What is the "world's music"?

 

the world's styles.....rock and its various forms, etc.

I think this is obvious to most Christians, and I believe the question is usually asked in order to argue.
We use discernment when it comes to evaluating every song we hear. There is no need to sound like the world (rock) in order to get the gospel out to everyone.

 

I guess it partly depends on the song and how it is played. Partly on how old it is.
For example, many churches that have your position DO have "Since Jesus Came Into My Heart" in their hymnals.
The syncopated beat came straight from "the world" several decades ago. Some Christians still think the above hymn is worldly.

Karen

 

Stop the music and entertainment and see how many of the converted stick and you will most likely have your answer to the original question. When Jesus cut off the food and started with heavy teaching he even had to ask the apostles if they were going to leave as well. Tickle their ears and they will come.

 

I think one main area where the line is often crossed is when the preaching is overshadowed by other things we are using to draw people to church. In some churches we are seeing preaching completely left out of the service. Then in others we see churches advertising that their preaching will not go over 20 minutes. Or their preaching is replaced by a play, or a music concert, or some other such thing.

Some have gotten it into their heads that preaching doesn't "work" anymore and so we ought to just throw it out.

 

guitarpreacher

I felt that there was an attack on your church and your choice of music.

Since the responce was to your post, it sounded like an attack to me. This could have been mitigated, had someone called the song by its title, rather than calling all of the music sensous.

Kinda sounded like, "You get drunk when you drink, because I get drunk when I drink." . . .

Someone forgot in the mixup of terminology, that I drink my coffee black . . .

[ December 04, 2005, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: El_Guero ]

 

Yes, you can cross the line. Preachers cross the line all the time.

The question should be, "Which line should a preacher cross to reach the lost?"

Jesus went TO the sinners. Too often we expect the sinners to come to Jesus on our terms. Jesus went to them on their terms. He gave them the Gospel in their context. Then He called the sinners to repent. Right where they were at, He called them to repent. And when they did not repent, He told them so (Matthew 11:18-20) & (Matthew 9:9-13).

 

Seeker sensitive is about taking the Gospel to where the lost will be in a seeker friendly environment. When conducted properly, seeker sensitive should not WATER DOWN the Truth. The women should not be 'sensuous', and the preachers should not be thinking about the women in that manner.

Could the real problem be that many preachers of the Gospel do not focus on the Gospel? Could it be that what is being reacted to in this thread is not "seeker sensitive" but is modern Gospel preaching?