tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post3151114090772537349..comments2024-03-29T09:24:12.719-05:00Comments on The Watchman's Bagpipes: Worship Songs ComparedGlenn E. Chatfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-26246857033304951592012-04-10T11:33:30.946-05:002012-04-10T11:33:30.946-05:00Well, hello Worship Pastor,
Just as a point of a...Well, hello Worship Pastor, <br /><br />Just as a point of amusement to me, you accuse me of being “quite one-sided,” but then you give me your “one-sided” comment. I am always amused by people who have an opinion of their own, but then call others with <i>their</i> own opinion, “opinionated”.<br /><br />When discussing what I refer to as “emotional” responses, I would suggest you re-read what I wrote. I am not denigrating the fact that we worship with our emotions, rather my point is that many of the CCM songs are meant to work one into an altered state of consciousness so as to be open to any suggestions. Ever watch videos from the “Pensacola Revival”? Ever watch stuff from Benny Hinn’s “crusades”? People are open to suggestions of being “slain in the spirit” or speaking in “tongues” or just plain focussing on how good they feel about being wrapped up in the music. (Sort of like being at a rock concert.) And true “emotional” worship must first be based in the intellect - understanding just who it is we are worshiping! The “true meaning” of worship is focussing on God and who He is, not focussing on self and getting into emotional highs so as to be open to deceitful teachings and crowd dynamics. That isn’t “worship” - it is manipulation.<br /><br />In the song discussed, the word,“know” is understood in the context as I explained it. Your resorting to other definitions doesn’t alter the context.<br /><br />As for worshiping with people who do so differently than I do, I have done so many times. I have worshiped with a wide variety of people of various ethnicities as well as social standings. Styles aren’t what bother me - false teachings and following them or giving tacit approval to them (viz, singing songs from said movements) is what bothers me.<br /><br />Since there is nowhere in the song “in the Garden”, the lyrics themselves, which speak of the story about Mary Magdalene, there is no way anyone can know that was what the author was thinking about. And I had never heard that about this song until now, and I looked it up on the net to verify it. Nevertheless, it still has the “boyfriend” Jesus appearance. I would guess there are very few people who knows the story this song refers to.<br /><br />And, Yes, I have some bias against the aberrational Vineyard movement, as I have against any false teachings. <br /><br />At the risk of causing offense, for those readers who have no idea what the Vineyard movement is, it was founded by John Wimber as a signs and wonders movement. Of course it is false signs and wonders, as the excess from the Toronto Airport Vineyard demonstrated many years ago - they were just the logical end of Vineyard teaching. <br /><br />Some of the teaching includes dominion theology (originating from such movements as Joel’s Army, Manifest Sons of God, etc - taking the “kingdom of God” by force); “power evangelism” - which Wimber described as combining the preaching of the Gospel with demonstration of supernatural signs and wonders, because the Gospel really isn’t effective on its own (although Jesus said it was an “adulterous generation” who sought signs and wonders); aberrant “spiritual warfare” which is totally unbiblical (Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare)<br /><br />Wimber said “God is not limited by His Word,” meaning that just because it isn’t in the Bible that doesn’t mean we can’t do it, which opens a whole new Pandora’s box of anything goes. He also claimed that he lived for extended periods of his life without sinning. Wimber, as a self-proclaimed prophet, said that, “Many if not most personal prophetic words given today are conditional, and as such are invitational, not certainties.” An O.T. prophet with that attitude would be stoned. The list of heretics, false teachers, Romanists and mystics who Wimber credits with influencing him and his teachings is shocking. And we must not forget his connection to the fraudulent “Kansas City Prophets.”Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-83340463634321689452012-04-09T18:12:34.389-05:002012-04-09T18:12:34.389-05:00I found this post when googling bad grammar in wor...I found this post when googling bad grammar in worship music. You have some interesting thoughts, but I must admit that I find them to be quite one-sided. You admit to feeling the need for "brain food" in worship music, and yet you find it offensive when worship tries to elicit an emotional response from the congregation through music. What about those in the congregation who have the need for "heart food"? In the Bible, you are called to love the Lord your God with all your HEART as well as soul and strength (Deut. 6:5). I understand the need for intellectual worship of God, but if you neglect the emotional worship of God, you are not obeying this command to its fullest extent, just as if you only sing emotional songs, you are not worshiping God with your mind. I hope you understand this challenge and do not mistake me. I also find it interesting how you easily interpret metaphors in hymns, such as "and now I am happy all the day", yet find it difficult to use definition 1 in the Dictionary for "know" ("to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty: I know the situation fully."), and instead choose to use definition 3 ("to be cognizant or aware of: I know it." [Definitions taken from dictionary.com]) when a word is used in a contemporary song. You obviously have some bias, especially in your tearing down of the Vineyard movement. I would wager a guess that you do not spend time with or go to church with many people who are different from you, or who worship God differently than you do, as you seem to say that there is only one right way to worship God (intellectually). I would like to challenge you to attend a few church services where there are poor people or people of different ethnicities than you (even better if you can do this overseas), and after listening to their contemporary music, interview some of the congregants and ask them what, if anything, they gleaned from the worship music. I think their responses may shock you. As a worship pastor, I understand that the primary reason to have music in a service is so that God may receive worship from his people, and secondarily, that His people may understand and reflect on truths about Him. You seem to have lost the first true meaning of worship music in the midst of all your criticism and checklists for songs to live up to, dwelling only on the second. I am not saying that we should accept all songs as right, but merely that in addition to holding them up to scriptural standards, we should also determine whether or not they are songs from which God may receive the glory. Oh and by the way, the old hymn "In the Garden" may not have the specificities you require for it not to be a "boyfriend" song; however it is the story from the Bible of Mary Magdalene's joy finding Jesus in the garden. It has a place in painting a word picture that many in the congregation who cannot relate to "raising an Ebenezer" will find joy in praising God with.A Worship Pastornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-14818189222209864162012-02-22T13:17:02.383-06:002012-02-22T13:17:02.383-06:00HisLitehuas
I’ve never heard of any of these, so I...HisLitehuas<br />I’ve never heard of any of these, so I had to look on-line for lyrics. <br /><br />“Break Every Chain” has some questionable theology about an “army rising up,” leading me to wonder about charismatic “Joel’s Army” stuff, and it is quite repetitious. I find it to be trite, if nothing else.<br /><br />I find nothing in “Signs and Wonders” that even tells me it is a Christian song. If this is used for worship, I’d be wondering what worship was. I see no rational thought process even as a secular song! I don’t understand what it is saying.<br /><br />“Heaven On Earth” is an unbiblical charismatic song about exalting oneself.<br /><br />If the church I was attended used these songs, and I couldn’t get them removed, I’d be looking for a new place of worship. The theology presented in these is unbiblical.<br /><br />You said your husband was on the worship team - does that mean he likes these or that he is in a bind?Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-64316544146643294542012-02-21T12:30:25.589-06:002012-02-21T12:30:25.589-06:00I would like to hear opinions on the following son...I would like to hear opinions on the following songs:<br />Break Every Chain<br />Signs and Wonders<br />Heaven On Earth<br /><br />My church has changed its' singing time and seems to be trying to make something happen with songs like these. I am very distraught about this new push and the lyrics of these songs, some of which have nothing to do with God or Jesus or the Word. I am in a bind because my husband is on the worship team. Prayers appreciated.Mary Ann Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183503594422588608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-68546547157934346392011-07-28T14:32:17.309-05:002011-07-28T14:32:17.309-05:00Hello Anonymous 7/26,
You sound like a very since...Hello Anonymous 7/26,<br /><br />You sound like a very sincere believer who takes his/her? (I’m guessing “her”) faith seriously. I appreciate that; there should be more believers like you in that regard.<br /><br />I don’t intend to offend, but I think it is important to understand the truth of what the Bible says, so if something I say offends you, I’m sorry because I do not want that.<br /><br />Let me start by saying that I looked at the sermon you linked to and I find a problem right off the bat with its reference to the Song of Solomon. The SoS has nothing to do with Christ, so the phrase, “You’re all together lovely, ” is immediately taken out of context. I never realized that this is where that song got the phrase from, but now that I know I can pan the song even more because it twists SoS into something it is not. So the song misuses Scripture, says we’ll “never know how much it cost,” and goes around and around in repetition. No wonder I never liked it!<br /><br />The Song of Solomon (Song of Songs) is a poetic story about two lovers marrying. It was never intended to be prophetic. It was only later in history made into an allegory of Christ and the Church because it was considered to be too lewd and sexual to be taken literally. Prudes turned into something it was never meant to be.<br /><br />Psalm 45, on the other hand, while also being a story about marriage, has been seen to be Messianic by the Jews long before Christ.<br /><br />The analogy of Christ being our bride (“our” being inclusive as a church, not singular as each person) cannot be taken to the romantic, “boyfriend Jesus” level. At no time in history was the relationship between Christ and the Church seen on this level until recent times with all the “feel good” theology and “worship” methods.<br /><br />The husbandly characteristics of Jesus outlined in this sermon are indeed characteristics every husband should have, and in this regard the sermon was good. But if you take it to a romantic level, then Christ only appeals to women because normal men don’t have romantic feelings for another man!<br /><br />About the linked site, “Let God Be True,” I want to caution my readers that there are some legalistic and aberrational teachings on that site, including the fraudulent and virtually cultic “King James Only” teaching. Other teachings are that Christians are required to tithe (i.e., mandated at least 10%), that the Church has replaced Israel, that using instruments for worship is unbiblical (an issue I previously addressed), anti-Christmas (another issue I previously addressed), anti-Easter celebration (another I addressed), etc. So anyone going to this site to see what anonymous is referring to, be very discerning.<br /><br />In His service,<br />GlennGlenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-77328512487968798092011-07-26T17:06:14.404-05:002011-07-26T17:06:14.404-05:00Hello Watchman,
I have just recently discovered y...Hello Watchman,<br /><br />I have just recently discovered your blog and have been incredibly blessed by the majority of what I've read thus far, including this article. I came out of the contemporary Christian movement by the grace of God alone and now attend a church that only sings hearty, Christ exalting hymns of praise to our God. I do not miss any of those new "worship" songs at all. I could expound on this and clarify my reasons as to why exactly this is, but I wanted to humbly address another matter that I feel needs to be addressed immediately. First of all, I am nothing. I am least of all the Lord's servants and unworthy to be one at all. I must preface what I am about to say with this because first of all it is sadly, yet entirely true, and secondly I know it can be difficult to discern tone though a written correspondence, and want you to know that this comes from a heart deeply burdened for another precious brother in Christ Jesus our Mighty, Glorious, Wonderful God, Lord, Saviour, and King, and it is sent with the utmost humility.<br /><br />Jesus Christ truly is altogether lovely! We are His bride, He is our bridegroom. My pastor just recently preached a sermon on this glorious subject and many in the congregation were having a difficult time fully appreciating this. Some said they can't appreciate it enough because they aren't married, others have said they can't fully grasp it because the are married. Because of comment like this He has convicted to continue passionately preaching on it until it sinks in and we are more in love with Jesus Christ than ever, for Who He is and all that He has done for us! I am thankful, as I am so feeble and so apt to forget, and can be just as cold on this subject as anyone. Here is one of his outlines on this subject. I encourage you to please read through it and would like to hear your thoughts on the subject.<br /><br />http://www.letgodbetrue.com/bible/christ/he-is-altogether-lovely.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-89522153194441452242011-07-25T09:41:18.752-05:002011-07-25T09:41:18.752-05:00Hi baldworshipguy,
It looks like you must be Dar...Hi baldworshipguy, <br /><br />It looks like you must be Darren!<br /><br />In the early 1970s there were lots of sappy, feel-good “Jesus people” songs. I couldn’t get in to them because I need “brain food.” Modern CCM really is just expanded over those trite songs. Here are those we sung in May 1974 (about four months after I became a Christian) when on a “Duty Day With God Religious Retreat”: “Lord I Want to Be a Christian,” “They’ll Know We Are Christians” (still sung in our church, and I have written an article about this one and guarding “each man’s dignity” and saving “each man’s pride”), “The Numbers Song,” “Every Day With Jesus,” “If You Want Joy,” “Give Me Oil in My Lamp,” “Jesus in the Morning,” “Walking With Jesus,” “Put Your Hand in the Hand,” “Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow,” “Here Comes Jesus.” These were mostly trite choruses. Of course we had some better stuff also. (This isn’t from memory - I still have the booklet.)<br /><br />As for the happiness issue, I think it is your argument which is weak. You want to play semantics, yet the context of the song - the words of Isaac Watts - really preclude your interpretation of what the chorus means by “happy.” I find it interesting that you pick out one word in the entire hymn. If the chorus had “joyful” instead of “happy,” I don’t think you’d give it a second thought, yet that is the context of “happy” in this chorus.<br /><br />I am not “kidding” myself about nostalgia. I like the hymns I do, not because of nostalgia, but because of the lyrics and the congruent music which go with them.<br /><br />As I previously noted, I like old and new also, but age makes no difference. What is important is that the lyrics are sound, and if I’m going to like a song the music also has to be congruent with the lyrics.<br /><br />I agree that there are assemblies who sing good songs and yet are dead churches, but that doesn’t mean God doesn’t “make” much of the issue of what we sing. I think He makes just as much of an “issue” of the songs as he does about the teaching - both must be theologically and doctrinally correct so as not to lead people astray. False teaching is false teaching whether sung or preached.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-37197488411937705252011-07-25T00:08:34.379-05:002011-07-25T00:08:34.379-05:00Glenn,
Thanks for your reply to my comment. I do ...Glenn,<br /><br />Thanks for your reply to my comment. I do find it interesting that you had no church experience at all growing up. That is indeed quite rare, from my dealings with people in the church, especially those with such a passion for the "old hymns". I do realize that you of a different generation than me, and even though you didn't "grow up" on the hymns, you most likely "grew up in Christ" on them. Also, you were a believer for a number of years before contemporary christian praise music came to be so popular, since you've been following Christ almost 40 years.<br /><br />I don't think there were many people singing anything other than hymns back then. I grew up in the church, but it was a the same time as you.<br /><br />As for your previous posts, I apologize for not being up to speed on them. I haven't had time to go back and read them, but I will make the effort. <br /><br />For the happiness issue, your argument is still weak. God never promised our happiness. Joy is so far removed from happiness. The disciples may well have been happy WHEN they got to Heaven, but tell that to my friend who just buried her daughter. What about the family who just found out their 2 week old has a heart defect and is given a month to live at best? Happy? Far from it. Joyful? Not even sure about that. And truthfully, why should they be? The majority of the Psalms deal with unhappy people. There's an entire book of the Bible called Lamentations. Enough about that. I merely just thought it was funny that you were using that particular song as your example of traditional hymns being so theologically sound.<br /><br />As for the nostalgia, you're kidding yourself if you say you don't feel nostalgic towards the hymns. Honestly, since you came to faith as an adult, they may even mean MORE to you, since they were the songs you sang when you were discovering Jesus for the first time. That's not a bad thing either. It is what it is.<br /><br />I personally like old and new songs. I just think WE make a lot more of the whole thing than God does. There are plenty of DEAD churches who sing nothing but the hymns. The hymns alone don't bring us any closer to God. Our daily walks and personal time in the Word and prayer do that. Truthfully, when any of us say we "can't worship" due to the songs being sung, we are actually worshiping ourselves. We're putting our own preferences and opinions ahead of God. <br /><br />Again, I'm most definitely not saying you do that in any way. I would love for you to come down to D.C. sometime and worship with us and give me your feedback. It's a hard job choosing which songs are appropriate for any given week in corporate worship. Getting everyone to agree that you've made wise choices is practically impossible...but it makes for good blogging.<br /><br />thanks for your time, Glenn!baldworshipguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01613291788729548020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-12236998034035148102011-07-18T09:02:12.514-05:002011-07-18T09:02:12.514-05:00Hi Ken,
I know it gets much worse, but rarely so...Hi Ken, <br /><br />I know it gets much worse, but rarely so in my church; our music director has a wee bit more discernment than that, but he still has people wanting this stuff.<br /><br />Hey, good to hear from a fellow Buckeye! I'm from Springfield, but haven't lived there since I went into the Army in 1970. Came out in 1975 and lived in Columbus until the end of Aug 1978 when the job took me to the Chicago area. We visit "home" at least once a year. Iowa reminds us a lot of it.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-19146319024623901882011-07-17T23:05:55.516-05:002011-07-17T23:05:55.516-05:00Oh, if only you knew how much worse it is than tha...Oh, if only you knew how much worse it is than that. Some of those songs I consider to be very biblical and worshipful. Look at songs such as "Everything Glorious" and "Awakening" by artists such as David Crowder and Chris Tomlin. Now these songs are nonsense. Why? Because the content is not even biblical. In fact, they are "me-focused." That's right, contemporary Christian music is becoming less biblical, and more me-focused. People are trying to command God to do things for them, rather than give God the praise He deserves. Let me show you the chours of the song "Everything Glorious":<br /><br />You make everything glorious<br />You make everything glorious<br />You make everyhing glorious<br />And I am yours<br />What does that make me?<br /><br />This is the contemporary worship. It's at most of the churches here in northeast ohio. This movement must be discerned carefully. I combat this by listening to the "good" contemporary worship from artists such as Keith and Kristen Getty, Stuart Townend, and Fernando Ortega. You and I both have hearts of discernment. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who sees these things.Ken Myers Jr.http://www.facebook.com/apachurinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-58188752384659561152011-07-11T11:20:58.518-05:002011-07-11T11:20:58.518-05:00Hello Darren,
Welcome to my blog. I'm sorry ...Hello Darren,<br /><br />Welcome to my blog. I'm sorry your first visit didn't go well.<br /><br />“Meaty truths” as I define them are those that speak of the sound doctrine of the Bible and not just “feel goodism”. <br /><br />"At the Cross", with the stanzas written by Isaac Watts, has a refrain which I really don’t think goes with what Watts wrote, and I’ve only recently heard this version (as a Lutheran we sang the stanzas to the tune “Martyrdom.”) However, you seem to discount the refrain (and the refrain of ANY song is repeated for each verse, but THAT is not what I’m complaining about when I complain about repetition, and I thought that was pretty plain).<br /><br />What is NOT biblically sound about that refrain? Do we or do we not have our eyes opened - receive our sight - at the cross of Christ? That is, do we or do we not understand the gospel and God’s mercies through the sacrifice of His son?<br /><br />As far as being “happy all the day,” happiness is how you want to define it. But as I understand the refrain, we are happy knowing we are eternally saved no matter what befalls us. The disciples who were killed, those who have been horrifically martyred over the centuries were indeed happy that they were eternally saved. THAT is very biblical.<br /><br />Those “crusty and dated” songs we had that week were only an EXAMPLE. I could pick worse stuff by bringing in lots of newer garbage which focus only on self. And I sincerely doubt that any current song would be “more biblically based” than most old hymns for the simple fact that most song writers now seem to be more biblically illiterate than in the past or else are just interested in emotional tripe. HOWEVER, I made note that there are many old hymns that are also abhorrent, yet you seem to have overlooked that point.<br /><br />And while many contemporary songs may be acceptable doctrinally, they are more for personal worship and devotion than they are suitable for corporate worship.<br /><br />Have you looked at the other hymns I’ve highlighted in past posts? I’ve pointed out a few excellent contemporary songs which are written by songwriters who “get it” - who are biblically literate: “O Church Arise” (3/21/11), “In Christ Alone” (2/11/10), and “How Deep the Father’s Love For Us” (1/15/10). “Old” hymns I’ve highlighted (and I am going to highlight another today) have included rich theology: “We Are Earthen Vessels” (12/16/09), “The Love of God” (1/31/10), When I Survey the Wondrous Cross” (1/25/11), “It Is Well With My Soul” (3/27/11), and “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name” (6/19/11).<br /><br />Again, I have pointed out that my argument isn’t old versus new - it is all about the lyrics. We should be adamantly opposed to new <b>or</b> old songs if the lyrics are bad. <br /><br />Oh, and I didn’t have any church experience as a child - I became a Christian at 22. So your “guess” is just plain wrong. You bring in all the red herrings about nostalgia, etc, but none of that was the issue, nor should it be. We need to have solid doctrine in our songs just as we need to have solid doctrine in our sermons. It doesn’t matter whether the song is “old” or “new” - it must be sound in the doctrine it presents.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-8304407916526902872011-07-11T10:09:12.780-05:002011-07-11T10:09:12.780-05:00Glenn,
I have found this post quite interesting a...Glenn,<br /><br />I have found this post quite interesting and entertaining (at least for the last 10-15 minutes).<br /><br />Anyway, I must disagree with your comment about the "meaty truths" of the hymn At The Cross.<br /><br />First, I'd like to know and understand what your definition of "meaty truth" is. Does that mean descriptive flowery language? If so, then I'm on board. Does it mean using language and phrases that none of use in our day-to-day lives? If so, then you're right again.<br />If it means "Is the truth set forth in the song actually TRUE in the Christian walk?" If so, I must say this particular hymn is flawed. And it's a line that's repeated several times.<br /><br />here we go...let's all sing together: It was there by faith I received my sight and NOW I AM HAPPY ALL THE DAY. Just not true. Not Biblically sound. That's not a promise of life with Christ at all. Ask the disciples who were KILLED!!<br /><br />As for the "contemporary" songs your church chose that week, I must say they are crusty and dated, and not really all that contemporary. I believe that MANY current praise songs are considerably more Biblically based than most of the "treasured hymns" of our past.<br /><br />Check out "You Never Let Go", "Your Unfailing Love", "How Deep The Father's Love For Us", "Great I Am", "In Christ Alone"...I could go ON, and ON and ON.<br /><br />When it comes to older traditional hymns being sung or not sung, and folks being so attached to them and adamently opposed to new songs, I believe it has to do with nostalgia more than anything else.<br /><br />When your church sings a song that you sang as a child, you're transported to a memory attached to your church experiences as a child...dinner on the grounds...Sunday school...getting pulled out of the pew by your ear when you talked during the sermon...ah, the memories.<br /><br />But in truth, people are not really that interested in hymns. Tell me of all the people you know who LOVE the hymns and ALSO have their ipods full of hymns. Do they listen to recordings of piano/organ with choir belting out "Bringing in the Sheaves"? Do they even know what a sheave is?<br /><br />My guess is, they, and possibly you, prefer to have church the way you remember it. We're all somewhat attached to the things of our youth and childhood. My favorite music is still 80's since that's when I "grew up".<br /><br />I have sung most every song in the Baptist hymnal. I still remember a TON of them. As a worship pastor, our church still sings 1-2 "oldies" per week, like "'Tis So Sweet","Amazing Grace", "When I Survey", "It Is Well", etc. But they are in no way more powerful, more Holy, more True, or closer to God than the more current songs that God is putting in the hearts of worship leaders and psalm writers around the world.<br /><br />Of course, that's only MY OPINION! Which is what this all is... a bunch of people's preferences. When we begin to understand that God wants our LIVES and cares little to nothing about what songs we sing, we can start to move closer in our walk with Him. Who cares even if the song is true that I'm singing. What matters is "Do I believe it?" "Am I living it out to the world around me?" And by the way, when reaching out to the world around us, what kind of music do you think is going to connect with them and meet them where they are? My guess is probably not "and now I am happy all the day", sung like a happy-go-lucky sing song tune from Guys and Dolls that doesn't even match that flowery descriptive "meaty truth" at all.<br /><br />The good thing for all of us is: If you don't like the music this week, it'll be different next week; or you can go to another church; or you can just turn on itunes and listen to hymns till you pass out (or Chris Tomlin).Darren Brownhttp://baldworshipguy.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-21717303917439262512011-07-03T18:47:17.426-05:002011-07-03T18:47:17.426-05:00Hi Neil,
I've heard about Mullins in the past...Hi Neil,<br /><br />I've heard about Mullins in the past. Seems like a decent fellow.<br /><br />I don't consider "Step by Step" to be a <i>good</i> song because it is just one stanza and a chorus repeated over and over. As noted, the message is okay, but the repetition is wearing. To me this is evidence of very little imagination, but that's just my opinion.<br /><br />As for "Awesome God," I fully understand he didn't mean "awesome" in a trite way, but I never liked the song because I think the first part is trite, childish and even trivializes God with the whole thing of rolling up his sleeves and "ain't putting on the ritz" (as if many people even know what "ritz" means). And bad grammar in songs is something I find very annoying. (ain't, 'em). As with the other songs, the actually message and most of the lyrics are fine, but then it goes into that incessant repetition!<br /><br />I'm just an old stick-in-the-mud who likes songs that say something meaty without endless repetitions. His songs are okay for personal use and "fun" singing, but really shouldn't be used for corporate worship.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-37756813320270893872011-07-03T11:00:14.622-05:002011-07-03T11:00:14.622-05:00Re. Rich Mullins & Step by Step -- just a bit ...Re. Rich Mullins & Step by Step -- just a bit of trivia about Mullins -- not necessarily saying to use all the songs in worship.<br /><br />He was very committed to his faith. He had his agents give away all his money -- and he surely made a lot -- except what the average worker would make, and he lived on that.<br /><br />Step by Step is a good song, but many churches (and people like Michael W. Smith) just sing the chorus, which of course makes it seem too simple and repetitive. <br /><br />Same thing with his song Awesome God. It actually mentions the fall (Adam and Eve kicked out of Eden), Sodom, mercy and grace at the cross, and that you'd "better be believing" that God is awesome. He didn't use "awesome" in the trite sense, but in the appropriate sense.Neilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01351286913547309232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-75661336686278875282011-07-03T07:35:22.652-05:002011-07-03T07:35:22.652-05:00Anonymous 7/3,
Of these songs, I am not throwing ...Anonymous 7/3,<br /><br />Of these songs, I am not throwing out the baby. My only complaint about the first one is that last line, which is sung ad nauseum.<br /><br />As I noted, there are indeed good contemporary songs and bad traditional songs. But we must always examine the lyrics. Teaching must be as solid in the songs as it is in the sermon.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-59908956013352045472011-07-03T01:12:44.176-05:002011-07-03T01:12:44.176-05:00Well you do have a point with some of those songs....Well you do have a point with some of those songs. I agree with you on a few points, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water. There's good modern songs and good hymns, and there's bad modern songs and hymns as well. If you don't believe that get the lyrics to the great speckled bird, which is completely misused. <br />But the most important part of worship is the heart, which is forgotten these days in many churches.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-77766299650540115512011-06-27T12:22:10.757-05:002011-06-27T12:22:10.757-05:00Julie,
I've never heard that song, but while ...Julie,<br /><br />I've never heard that song, but while I think the lyricist was trying to convey that in every thing we do, we WANT to honor Him, I have to agree with you that the phrase as written is really untrue.<br /><br />Thanks for that tidbit of discernment!Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-44715648971601053992011-06-27T12:19:53.493-05:002011-06-27T12:19:53.493-05:00Randy,
I don’t think your comparison is valid. S...Randy, <br /><br />I don’t think your comparison is valid. Scripture tells us exactly what it cost for Christ to die for our sins, so we can indeed know. Perhaps if the lyrics read, “I’ll never understand how much it cost,” that would be more accurate. But remember, that one line is my only complaint about the lyrics in that song - the repetition was more bothersome.<br /><br />The repetition in most CCM is there for working up an emotional high - not just “feeling” - as demonstrated by their use in all the charismatic churches where people get into altered states of consciousness and get “slain” and all that stuff. If it is a Vineyard song, warning bells should immediately go off.<br /><br />Citing Paul is taking him out of Context. Using him to justify songs with poor doctrine is like using him to justify Mormonism. It was my trip through Mormonism that eventually led me to Christ, but I dare say Paul wouldn’t say Mormonism would be an okay way to reach people for Christ.<br /><br />I fully understand about the songs, but what you have to understand is that the songs are just as important as the sermon; they must have solid doctrine. We don’t do sermons (or shouldn’t do them) to make people feel good, nor should we do songs just to make people feel good. That is Joel Osteen’s business. Our job is to preach the truth. If the truth makes people feel good, that’s fine, but if the sermon or the songs just appeal to the emotions and just make us feel good about being in church without having any idea of what the doctrine was, then we haven’t done our job of edifying the saints.<br /><br />Your comment about “The Garden” demonstrates one of the main problems about songs in church - or even for personal devotion. We find a favorite and we turn off objectivity because we like it. No, MacArthur’s comment isn’t my only complaint - I used him to buttress my argument. The song is a “Jesus is my boyfriend” type song. The lyrics are awful and void of any doctrine.<br /><br />If a church has a very solid foundation with good teaching and good leadership, I doubt that they will have much bad music, so leaving just over music would most likely not be an issue.<br /><br />As for God telling a worship leader about a song, I find it more likely that the worship leader has favorite songs he does whenever he’s there. Our primary leader mixes old and new for the opening songs, and most are of a praise and worship nature. Then the song before the sermon usually is something which goes with the message. The closing songs will also often have something to do with applying the message to our lives, or else just edifying songs of encouragement in the faith.<br /><br />Cross-over music, as you call things like “Breathe,” are what I think can be very dangerous theologically. But that is my opinion.<br /><br />And, Randy, you come across just fine - I hope I also come across okay. Sometimes just stating viewpoints back and forth can be misinterpreted as attacks, etc. I’m just a “here’s what I think, and here’s what you think” sort of person. Never take anything personal - unless it’s name-calling :oDGlenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-36306938171788337962011-06-26T18:00:15.033-05:002011-06-26T18:00:15.033-05:00I agree; many of the contemporary songs are dumbed...I agree; many of the contemporary songs are dumbed down and really have no depth to them at all.<br />Does anyone beside me have a problem with singing, "In everything I do, I honor You."?<br />That's at the end of a popular song (I can't remember which one right now) and I just can't quite get the words out. It's just blatantly false. There are plenty of things I do that do NOT honor the Lord. Why would I want to even say that? Am I misunderstanding what the lyricist is trying to get across?Julienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-24745391745252283742011-06-26T05:35:05.634-05:002011-06-26T05:35:05.634-05:00Sigh. I guess I should have said unfairly judge. Y...Sigh. I guess I should have said unfairly judge. You're right, we all judge. <br /><br />When you say it's possible to know the cost, you sound like the person at a funeral who tells the family "I know just how you feel." You may have read in a book something about it, you may have even lost a love one that bears the same relationship, but you can't really <i>know</i> how they feel. What's amazing is that we have a High Priest who really does know how we feel. I'll never know why He chose to die for my sins.<br /><br />You talk about mind numbing repetition, yet you admit that the Psalms are often that way. You talk about being there to elicit feeling. I'd argue that if worship doesn't elicit feeling, it's not really worship.<br /><br />There's a verse in one of Paul's letters (Corinthians?) that talks of people preaching for the wrong reasons. Paul says that as long as it brings people to Christ, it's ok. I think Paul would say the same about what you call bad worship music.<br /><br />Glenn, I know you mean well. Like Paul telling the Corinthians (1 Cor 3:2) that he wished they could eat meat, but he'll just explain the simple stuff, you're trying to educate. Instead, why don't you try to understand? Why don't you speak to someone singing these songs and ask them what they feel? Tell them that John wrote these things that they <i>could</i> know.<br /><br />And Dude, lay off "The Garden." It's one of my favorites. Your only complaint about it is that John MacAurthur said something bad about it and you can't even remember what he said. <br /><br />I left this discussion a while back because I'd said all I needed to say. I came back because someone else was saying the same thing and you still didn't see the point. <br /><br />I tried some HTML tags, I hope they come out right. More importantly, I hope my tone comes across right. As someone said - debate, don't divide. I would never leave a church over the music. When I don't like what's being sung, I just assume God told the worship leader there was someone else there that needed to hear it. I try to figure out what God was telling the writer and what he was trying to express.<br /><br />Oh, and I like cross-over music too. Even hymns sung by people that I know don't live the life. Yes, you have to know their heart. It's the heart of a sinner. Much like mine.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16477949304113673930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-11974461985131799112011-06-25T20:16:54.064-05:002011-06-25T20:16:54.064-05:00Randy, I also stated that there are Psalms which d...Randy, I also stated that there are Psalms which don't specifically mention God. That isn't the point. The point is the song itself is vacuous and has one purpose - emotional. The root is VIneyard. <br /><br />Ah yes, pull out the old "judgmental" charge. But aren't you being judgmental against me?<br /><br />We are called to be judgmental, by the way. We are to judge right from wrong.<br /><br />Apparently I've struck a nerve with one of peoples' favorite feel-good songs.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-74964658199541491192011-06-25T20:07:54.557-05:002011-06-25T20:07:54.557-05:00Glenn, the book of Esther doesn't mention God ...Glenn, the book of Esther doesn't mention God - should it be removed from the Bible? As Paul said - Heaven forbid.<br /><br />I agree with Buddy, I think you're being judgmental.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16477949304113673930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-28764292281531187332011-06-25T19:40:37.542-05:002011-06-25T19:40:37.542-05:00Buddy,
I wasn't judging artists - I was judg...Buddy, <br /><br />I wasn't judging artists - I was judging lyrics.<br /><br />The lyrics of the one you discuss are, "I'll never know how much it cost" - not "I'll never experience how much it cost." Let's stick with the lyrics. The point is that we DO know the cost because the Word of God tells us. My guess is that the author was looking for something sentimental to end with.<br /><br />Repetition is usually there to work up an emotional state, and that is the main problem with it. And it doesn't take a whole lot of talent to write, nor does it take a whole lot of contemplation when singing.<br /><br />I understand it is the heart of the person which determines which God one is worshiping, and there are even some Psalms that people could claim have no specific God identified. But "Breathe" isn't only something that could be sung to any god, it is also totally vacuous of all doctrine - it is all emotion and comes from a signs and wonders movement. If we are going to be singing to and about the Lord, let's have songs which actually have meaning.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-15348618175510492892011-06-24T17:26:38.972-05:002011-06-24T17:26:38.972-05:00Though I agree we need to use discernment and it&#...Though I agree we need to use discernment and it's good express and discuss these things, I think we need to be careful to be quick to judge and artist without truly knowing their heart. For example, when I hear "I'll never know how much it cost to see my sin upon the Cross.", I think no, I will never know (experience) what it cost because I don't have to pay it, it has been paid for me. Thank God.<br /><br />As for the repetition, I don't know it's necessarily bad as long as the theology of what is being sang is sound. Seems more of a preference to me.<br /><br />And for the "cross-over" songs. I do lean towards being "against" those, but really, isn't it the heart of the person singing the song that matters? If they are singing to Christ, then what does it matter that the same song could be sang to some other god?<br /><br />Just my thoughtsBuddy Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07750603890411347873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-20254729412831995202011-06-21T23:04:51.367-05:002011-06-21T23:04:51.367-05:00Now i feel tongue tied singing songs on my christi...Now i feel tongue tied singing songs on my christian radio station. To be honest they are mind numbing and I just thought it was me alone who wanted something (how do i put it?) ...meaty.Acidrihttp://twistedcrownofthorns.comnoreply@blogger.com