Scripture More Accurately
Well-Known Member
The Bible.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Scripture More Accurately
Well-Known Member
The Bible does not specify that information. God apparently expects us to understand what such an immoral woman would do as part of her immoral activities without His having to give us specific information in Scripture.
You are responsible. You have directly made a claim and attributed it to Amy Grant with no source. It is not my responsibility to prove the accuracy of your claim. It is your responsibility to back up your claim or admit that you are gossiping based on your own feelings about Amy Grant.
I didn't like the song until I realized it was a poetic take on John 20. It is experiential rather than informational. But I'm not sure experiential themed music equates to poor theology.
Here is C Austin Miles' (the songs writer) account of how he wrote the song;
“One day in April 1912, I was seated in the dark room where I kept my photographic equipment, and also my organ. I drew my Bible toward me and it opened at my favorite book and chapter, John chapter twenty. I don’t know if this was by chance or by the work of the Holy Spirit. I will let you the reader decide. That story of Jesus and Mary in John 20 had lost none of its power and charm.
It was though I was in a trance, as I read it that day, I seemed to be part of the scene. I became a silent witness to that dramatic moment in Mary’s life when she knelt before her Lord and cried, “Rabboni”. I rested my hands on the open Bible, as I stared at the light blue wall. As the light faded, I seemed to be standing at the entrance of a garden, looking down a gently winding path, shaded by olive branches. A woman in white, with head, bowed, hand clasping her throat, as if to choke back her sobs, walked slowly into the shadows. It was Mary. As she came unto the tomb, upon which she placed her hand, she bent over to look in and ran away.
John, in a flowing robe, appeared looking at the tomb. Then came Peter, who entered the tomb, followed slowly by John. As they departed, Mary reappeared leaning her head upon her arm at the tomb, she wept. Turning herself, she saw Jesus standing there, so did I. I knew it was He. She knelt before Him, with arms outstretched, and looking into His face cried, “Rabboni”.
I awakened in sunlight, gripping my Bible with my muscles tense, and nerves vibrating, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I wrote as quickly as the words could be formed the lyrics exactly as it is sung today. That same evening, I wrote the tune. It is sung today as it was written in 1912.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.godtube.com/popular-hymns/in-the-garden/?amp=1
Scripture More Accurately
Well-Known Member
I did not say that it is your responsibility to prove the accuracy of what I said. What I did say is that you can find such information for yourself online.
Regardless, anyone who has seen some of her music videos and is honest can know exactly what is being communicated beyond the words that are being sung.
I confess, the last time I saw her in concert was in 1982 and Michael W Smith was her piano player. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Great now show, from Scripture, how hymns are godly but CCM is not.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
I believe that is the viewpoint of the poster that was directed towards for sure.If I like it, then it is Godly. If I don't, it isn't. Any more questions?
Ouch, "it was like I was in a trance..."
Second, was he unaware that there were no roses in that garden and likely no dew? Do we imagine that God threw him into a trance?
Sorry, Jon, your quotation here actually makes me cringe even more at this song.
*John 20:1-18*
Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes. But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb. And she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. They said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?” Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to him in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”—and that he had said these things to her.
Yea. The song reminds me of a part of most of Spurgeons sermons (his use of imagry in his published sermons ... which is the main reason I like Spurgeon).
Really, Spurgeon? A "master key"? God gives us a master key? And we use this key to unlock God's heart?? If you dissect it it falls apart.
Anyway, the difference is the song does not have the rest of a sermon to accompany it. It is a song, and unlike many hymns it conveys truth on only one level. But the truth it conveys, well, It conveys very well.
In the Garden is like listening to Ravel's Bolero. Ravel complained it contained "no form, properly speaking, no development, no or almost no modulation", i.e., it was not "music". But what was conveyed was conveyed very well.
Or you could compare it to Shakespeare (or...
Monty Python
). There are components working at different levels. Some appreciate only one level. The hymn is written very simply in only one dimension (unfortunately a dimension that is less appreciated today).
LOL, you have contrived quite a fantasy about a song that is theologically and biblically weak. It certainly tugs at emotions.Yea. The song reminds me of a part of most of Spurgeons sermons (his use of imagry in his published sermons ... which is the main reason I like Spurgeon).
Really, Spurgeon? A "master key"? God gives us a master key? And we use this key to unlock God's heart?? If you dissect it it falls apart.
Anyway, the difference is the song does not have the rest of a sermon to accompany it. It is a song, and unlike many hymns it conveys truth on only one level. But the truth it conveys, well, It conveys very well.
In the Garden is like listening to Ravel's Bolero. Ravel complained it contained "no form, properly speaking, no development, no or almost no modulation", i.e., it was not "music". But what was conveyed was conveyed very well.
Or you could compare it to Shakespeare (or...
Monty Python
The hymn is written very simply in only one dimension (unfortunately a dimension that is less appreciated today).
The fact that the composer claims he was in a "trance" is a huge red flag. The song is merely emotional storytelling designed to elicit a human reaction that is easily mistaken for being Spirit lead.
In short, it's a bad song, but you feel good so somehow that beats good theology.
It is not theologically weak. But you are right that it is emotional. And because of the genre you miss what is being communicated (even in the writers account, as he never says he was in a trance).
It is one dimensional in that it is only trying to convey the experience of Mary in John 20.
The type of genre is for some people, not for others.
And I have noticed a growing hardness in many churches (by this I mean a move from emotionalism). This type of song certainly will not be understood by these Christians. They prize information over emotion (just as some value emotion over information).
It is interesting how things once understood become misunderstood over time as groups separate more and more to one end of a spectrum or the other.
But when you start analyzing Spurgeon's comments about the master keys, or the match in the coach...or this song Miles...they fall apart because you completely miss what is being communicated.
I directed it at you because I knew you would find humor in it.
Here's the lyrics.
1 I come to the garden alone,
While the dew is still on the roses;
And the voice I hear, falling on my ear,
The Son of God discloses.
Refrain:
And He walks with me, and He talks with me,
And He tells me I am His own,
And the joy we share as we tarry there,
None other has ever known.
2 He speaks, and the sound of His voice
Is so sweet the birds hush their singing;
And the melody that He gave to me
Within my heart is ringing. [Refrain]
3 I'd stay in the garden with Him
Tho' the night around me be falling;
But He bids me go; thro' the voice of woe,
His voice to me is calling. [Refrain]
Honestly, the song is empty lyrics filled with surmising and speculation. It creates a historical fiction at best. It's similar to what the TV series, the Chosen, is doing with the Gospels. It's creating a fictional back story within a sliver of truth. Ultimately it serves no theological purpose in teaching us about God. Instead its only function is to create an emotional response from a very human-centric position. Ultimately it does more harm than good for the Christian who truly seeks to know their God.
You sound like Jimmy Swaggart. He always said he just knew what music was good and what was of Satan. His honkey tonk piano music was Godly, but it sounded just like his cousins Jerry Lee Lewis and Mickey Gilleys honky tonk piano music. For some reason music that sounded like rock was of the devil because how it sounded. You remind me of Jimmy.
That is because you do not understand the genre.
It focuses on the experience related in John 20 of Mary seeing Jesus.
What you seem to looking for is a hymn to reflect the words of Scripture. BUT what this song does is assume that the Christian is already familiar with John 20.
You are right that somebody who does not know the account of Mary at the tomb would not learn it in this song. But this song is not meant to be a replacement for Scripture. It is a meditation, if nothing else, on the experience if meeting our risen Savior.
I am not saying you should like, or dislike, it. I am, however, saying that if you cannot discern the theological aspect of the song then perhaps this is simply not a genre for you.
No, it doesn't focus on anything. It never gives any indication it is talking about Mary. Even if it did, it provides no substance.
Jon, you are desperately looking for a philosophical, existential experience in the song and then try to create value where there is none.
Listening to the song does nothing to enrich the true spiritual condition of the audience, but it does enrich their man-centered emotions. They get a fluffy bunny god who helps them feel good when they are feeling blue. It only lasts until the song is done and it teaches them nothing about the God in scripture.
But, perhaps feelings drive humans while truth lies dormant in today's society.
It focuses very much on Mary at the tomb of Jesus.
Consider Debussy's Par les rues et par les chemins. If you don't know what it is about then it may sound like meaningless music. But I chose Ibéria as most are probably at least familiar with the material. Just knowing the subject gives the piece a context. The music takes it from there (not providing the context but the substance).
Likewise, of you are unfamiliar with John 20, or unaware that this is the context, then In the Garden may sound like an empty emotional song. BUT if you know the context then the song provides substance.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
You thought right
So 1 person (you) says he knows the "real" context while the rest of the globe sings a song that makes no biblical point, but they feel good so kudos for that.
Jon, you are digging deep to try find something edible from a song that is void of any substance.
I shared the words. No one is going to make the connection you are trying to make.
- Status