Music

Don't know, never heard it. I try to avoid Casting Crowns if at all possible.

That's fine! Considering your views, I totally understand.

http://millersinalaska.org/ministry/laus-deo-homeschool-choir/

This is more my kind of music :)

I'll have to check it out!

Okay, I was really not planning on getting involved with this discussion, but I feel that I must. I do want to start off by saying though, that I am not arguing, just observing.

Well, in typical 4/4 time, the beat is ONE two THREE four, where rock music has changed it to one TWO three FOUR. Also, on the issue of using CCM in church, should not Christians be able to worship together with one style that doesn't go against anyone's conscience?

First off, what does 4/4 time have to do with anything? What is wrong with rock music beat changing it to one TWO three FOUR? Is the beat ONE two THREE four the only beat you think is okay? Where in Scripture does it say that ONE two THREE four is the only type of beat that is okay to listen to? If you can't give Biblical evidence that you must stick to the "typical beat", then it seems like you are basing your argument on your personal opinion.

Also, how do you explain all of the other types of time signatures? (3/4, 6/8, 3/8, 2/2, etc.) Those don't keep the same "typical beat" as 4/4. Are those wrong? Is syncopation wrong? The emphasis is on the AND after one. What is okay to you then? Again, can you prove from Scripture that changing the supposed "typical beat" is wrong?

I hope I didn't sound rude, that is certainly not my intention.

I was using 4/4 time as an example since it's the easiest.

Why did it suddenly change in the 60s from the traditional beat? It's only rebellion, wanting something different.

Again, can you show me from Scripture how it is wrong or rebellious? Wanting something different is not rebellious.
(This question ^^ is the heart of the discussion, so I plan on asking until I get an answer.)

It's not in Scripture because an unnatural beat was not thought of by the people who wrote scripture.

Like I have said before: the heart of the culture is it's music. Music encourages a particular behavior. Music reflects the culture. And what would you call American culture? Rebellious. And when did it become rebellious? WHEN ROCK MUSIC BECAME POPULAR.

Ok, like Rosie, I certainly was not planning on getting involved with this discussion. But, I do want to point out that, as far as ONE two THREE four vs. one TWO three FOUR, rock music was not what changed that. In fact, switching the "downbeat" in and therefore the particular rhythm - Beethoven was the one who started that.

And, it's interesting to note that some of our great hymns were written to the tunes of the secular drinking songs of the day…

Who cares about what the beat is…..Either music brings glory to God or it doesn't, in which case you are taking the Lords name in vain…
I don't listen to CCM because most of it is sung in a style that only brings glory to the person singing it. That is breaking the 3rd commandment. Now if you want to bring up classical artist and say that they are also not bringing glory to God, I can refute that by saying that they never claimed to! Yea..hymns can be used for self glorification, but much less likely. Secular music? Just look at the artists life and the lyrics and as a Christian you should be disgusted.

And, it's interesting to note that some of our great hymns were written to the tunes of the secular drinking songs of the day...

Actually, no. Luther wrote one hymn, and set it to a folk love-song that was never well known. It was published once, and someone complained about it. He pulled it out of print. It was never printed until 75 years after his death, after that song had died out, so to speak.

And What Child is This is a folk song/Christmas carol, not a hymn.

(I've been waiting for that argument :D)

I don't listen to CCM because most of it is sung in a style that only brings glory to the person singing it. That is breaking the 3rd commandment. Now if you want to bring up classical artist and say that they are also not bringing glory to God, I can refute that by saying that they never claimed to! Yea..hymns can be used for self glorification, but much less likely. Secular music? Just look at the artists life and the lyrics and as a Christian you should be disgusted.

Well, some classical composers did compose for the glory of God, and many people glorify the person, which is sad.

Yes, but Wesley did write some of his hymns to drinking tunes and even said so. By the way, have you gotten the Bible Bee music CDs?

Yes.

Do you think people shouldn't use drums at all?

No. But I think at this point they're almost completely misused. I personally don't like drums except in a very few situations.

About the Beethoven thing - I was just pointing out that he was one of the ones to introduce "irregular" beats - it wasn't the rock musicians idea. And I asked about the BB CDs because in quite a few of the songs they use drums and some of the songs could be considered CCM style… and they are not trying at all to "draw in" unbelievers by it. Don't you agree?

I'm not directing this at anyone in particular - just wanted to bring this up. This is the mission statement of a Christian group that re-writes hymns or puts old hymns to new music. The "U" point of their statement was especially interesting…

"Our vision for worship fits into the acronym THOUSAND. We long to cultivate worship that is:

TRUE
Worship must be TRUE. By this we mean that 1) worship is in and for Jesus Christ, the true God, and 2) worship is directed and driven by the revelation of God's truth. 1) Worship is in Christ because His mediating work alone transforms our idolatry to true worship. Worship is for Christ because the aim of worship is the glory of God through the glory of His Son Jesus. 2) Worship is the proper response we make to God's revelation. God reveals Himself to us in creation, by His Word, and through the ministry of His Spirit. The Bible is the only objective and sure way to know the true God and how to worship Him rightly. Therefore, the Bible must not only direct our understanding and practice of worship, but should also drive our worship as we seek to encounter God in response to understanding Him in Scripture. The centerpiece of God's revelation – the gospel of God's grace shown to undeserving sinners through the substitutionary life and death of His Son – must also be the central theme which every time of worship remembers, proclaims, and celebrates.

HISTORICAL
Worship must be HISTORICAL. While Scripture is the only infallible source of direct revelation concerning a right understanding and practice of worship, it leaves out many specifics concerning liturgical forms for worship. Because of pride, we have a natural tendency to believe that our opinions and ideas about worship forms are more effective or relevant than the opinions of those who have gone before us. We will seek to stem this tide by using and updating various worship elements from church history including hymns, creeds, prayers, and readings.

OVERFLOWING in Missions and Mercy
Worship must overflow in MISSIONS AND MERCY. Just as Isaiah's powerful encounter with the holy God moved him to volunteer for God's mission to Israel, our worship should propel us outward to proclaim the gospel to all nations. The goal of missions is to see idolaters become worshipers, for the glory of God and the joy of all peoples. Public worship itself should also be a witness of God's presence to unbelieving visitors as the church celebrates God's truth. God shows undeserving, spiritually bankrupt sinners unconditional and unfathomable mercy in the gospel as Jesus exchanges all our debts for His riches. As we remember and experience this truth in worship we should be moved to extend mercy to others in concrete acts of charity.

UNDERSTANDABLE
Worship must be UNDERSTANDABLE. The effectiveness of particular vocabulary, phrasing, posture, liturgies, musical styles, lyric forms, styles of dress, and even architecture and room layout are all integrally tied to culture. While truth never changes, the way that truth is expressed and has impact varies from culture to culture (or sub-culture to sub-culture). While always looking to the past for wisdom and proven liturgical guidance, we will seek, though not exclusively, to update the styles and forms of the past for today's culture. A concrete example of this is taking hymn texts from several hundred years ago and updating their language for clarity and writing new tunes and styles of music in which to cast them. Though public worship is primarily for believers, we must worship in a way that is culturally accessible and intelligible for unbelievers as well.

STIRRING
Worship must be STIRRING. God is the ultimate creative being. He formed the universe by the word of His power, out of nothing, in order to provide a compelling witness to His power and beauty. Man has been designed in His image with both creativity and the ability to be affected by creation, and with a charge to bring order and beauty to this world. We should strive to use the creative power God has given us to captivate people – mind and heart – and direct them to God's truth in order that they might worship Him with their whole being. Taking care not to rely on the power of art rather than the Holy Spirit, and taking care not to let creativity or beauty become idols, we nonetheless should strive to make worship, in all of its forms, beautiful.

ALL-OF-LIFE
Worship must be experienced in ALL OF LIFE. Scripture reveals several ways that worship manifests itself: public or gathered worship, family worship, private worship, and conversational worship. Public worship refers to the gathered assembly of a local church or sub-group of the local church. Family worship refers to those in a household turning their attention towards God together at set times. Private worship refers to individual devotional time with God. Conversational worship refers to the spontaneous response to God believers are commanded to offer throughout their day on a moment-by-moment basis. We will seek to cultivate all-of-life worship, worship in all of these forms.

NOURISHING CONGREGATIONAL PARTICIPATION
Worship must nurture CONTREGATIONAL PARTICIPATION. Our songs, readings, prayers, and other liturgical elements should be written and led in such a way as to encourage participation by all. Our services should seek to balance passive participation such as listening with active participation such as speaking and singing. The primary function of music in worship is to encourage, support, and enhance congregational singing. When the inherent power of music is wed to truth-filled lyrics it becomes a unique and powerful tool that God uses to help us connect our minds and hearts and feel the great doctrines that we sing.

DEEP
Worship must be theologically DEEP. The more deeply we understand God's character and works, the more deeply we can experience Him in worship. Every element of our worship, from songs to sermons, should be marked by a pursuit of the knowledge of God both biblically and systematically. At the same time, we should strive to communicate the deep truths of Scripture at an intellectual level that is accessible to our particular congregation and provide a balance of simple and complex elements of worship. We particularly value the theology that was emphasized and clarified in the Protestant Reformation. "

from www.thousandtongues.org/who/mission/

(Sorry this was so long!)

I won!

UNDERSTANDABLE Worship must be UNDERSTANDABLE. The effectiveness of particular vocabulary, phrasing, posture, liturgies, musical styles, lyric forms, styles of dress, and even architecture and room layout are all integrally tied to culture. Okay, so we'll have the worship leaders up there in skinny jeans, pants that are falling down, and shirts with nasty messages on them. We'll slouch and glower. Okay. While truth never changes, the way that truth is expressed and has impact varies from culture to culture (or sub-culture to sub-culture). While always looking to the past for wisdom and proven liturgical guidance, we will seek, though not exclusively, to update the styles and forms of the past for today's culture. A concrete example of this is taking hymn texts from several hundred years ago and updating their language for clarity and writing new tunes and styles of music in which to cast them. I can understand the words of the hymns. They're very clear. I don't think I'm smarter than most other people. Though public worship is primarily for believers, we must worship in a way that is culturally accessible and intelligible for unbelievers as well. So we'll enter the land and worship Jehovah in the same way as they worshiped their idols. (Deuteronomy 12) NOURISHING CONGREGATIONAL PARTICIPATION Worship must nurture CONTREGATIONAL PARTICIPATION. Our songs, readings, prayers, and other liturgical elements should be written and led in such a way as to encourage participation by all. Our services should seek to balance passive participation such as listening with active participation such as speaking and singing. The primary function of music in worship is to encourage, support, and enhance congregational singing. When the inherent power of music is wed to truth-filled lyrics it becomes a unique and powerful tool that God uses to help us connect our minds and hearts and feel the great doctrines that we sing)

Most worship today, the congregation does not participate.

1) They can't sing parts. There are no notes for them to read.

2) Most songs nowadays are written to high for people to sing.

3) The format of most worship services today are that of performance, not participation.

I'm not opposed to changing the tunes to the hymns for performance. I do it myself, though I always keep to the tune mostly. But in corporate worship, they should use the well-known, or what were once well-known, tunes, so that we really can sing together.

headdeskheaddeskheaddesk

You are making such extreme generalizations that I don't even feel like responding……

Well, sorry. This is what I've seen, and I've been told we're in very mild churches… Come on, I've been in almost 60 churches at this point.

But please, if you want to end the argument, please do. I hate arguing. Especially with you guys. It wears me out just to think of it.

Notes Granted individual notes are neutral. Like bullets, notes are neutral in themselves; it is only a matter of what is done with them. Or, like letters of the alphabet, they are neutral; it is only a matter of how they are put together. Play the chord CEG on the piano. Now move one finger and play CEF. It is quite a different effect, a different mood. The first is resolution and rest. The second is tension. The first is pleasant and the second is discord. You don’t need to know a thing about music to feel that. There is an inherent message in the sound. An ambulance siren does not need an interpreter. When watching a movie, it is easy to tell by the music that danger is approaching before ever it is seen on the screen. The point? Music by itself communicates by way of the notation. Rhythm The beat, that is, how long notes are played makes music speak. Take two hymns, Leaning on the Everlasting Arms, and, My Faith Has Found a Resting Place. They are similar in content, but due to the different rhythms, one is lively, and even lends itself to clapping, whereas the second calls for resignation. The composer uses staccato for a reason. Even accent in our speech gives out a message. One might say, “I can tell by the way you said that, you are angry.” Tribal musicians work warriors into a murderous frenzy with drums alone. The drums of a marching band can make the hair stand up on the back of your head with a sense of foreboding power and aggression. Someone observed, beat is needed, but, like heart beat, too much means trouble. Volume How loudly notes are played makes music speak. Composers put crescendos in there for a reason. Seventy-six blaring trombones give off quite a different effect than just one playing the same thing softly. Contrast the delicacy of an instrumental quartet with the swelling tide of a philharmonic orchestra or the scream of a rock band. Musicians know volume communicates and they use that plaintive softness or threatening loudness.

I just found this, Carissa. Thanks for posting it :) It says a lot of what I've been trying to say.

I've been to a huge variety of churches - Pentacostal (unfortunately), conservative and not-so-conservative Baptist, semi-reformed Baptist, and Presbyterian - all with a huge variety of music styles. I'm going to reply based on what I have seen in churches…

Most worship today, the congregation does not participate.

Most churches I've been to, most people sing. I don't know how many people sing at the churches you've been to - that's just what I've seen.

1) They can't sing parts. There are no notes for them to read.

Why wouldn't there be notes for them to read? Just because the words would be on the screen? Why not have a bulletin insert with the actual sheet music if that would be a problem? Besides, at our church, besides for the musician and worship leader, there are three people at the most that read notes.

2) Most songs nowadays are written to high for people to sing.

"Too high" or "too low" is different for each person. The hymns get just as high - maybe higher - than most "modern" songs.

3) The format of most worship services today are that of performance, not participation.

Yeah, I can see that - at least in the Pentacostal church I was at. But our church just has a piano and a worship leader (our elder). I don't think that could be considered "performance."

I'm not opposed to changing the tunes to the hymns for performance. I do it myself, though I always keep to the tune mostly. But in corporate worship, they should use the well-known, or what were once well-known, tunes, so that we really can sing together.

Sure, for songs like "O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing" or "Amazing Grace." But what about songs like "Christian, Dost Thou See Them" or "Majestic Sweetness" that no one has heard? When we had a pastor, he often chose songs that no one knew but were theologically sound and fit the sermon. Who would be bothered then if we used a different tune?

That said, I don't agree with most CCM songs being used in a worship service. Especially not with drums - although I wouldn't mind a guitar. :) But I DON'T have a problem with using these songs in personal worship or just listening to for enjoyment.

Sorry if this sounded harsh or rude, I was just trying to make a point. :)

(And you never replied to my comment about the Bible Bee CDs……………)

I don't like very much drum-beat in a song either, but there are still good CCM songs out there that don't have so much of that.

You're Welcome. Just to let you know I don't agree with all of it. Also, though I agree with most of what you say I do not agree with all…I think you might be taking it a bit to far in some places.

You just said all that was on my mind. :)

Yeah, she takes it even farther than you and Rachel, and that's saying something! :P

I've been to a huge variety of churches - Pentacostal (unfortunately), conservative and not-so-conservative Baptist, semi-reformed Baptist, and Presbyterian - all with a huge variety of music styles. I'm going to reply based on what *I* have seen in churches...

Most worship today, the congregation does not participate.

Most churches I've been to, most people sing. I don't know how many people sing at the churches you've been to - that's just what I've seen.

1) They can't sing parts. There are no notes for them to read.

Why wouldn't there be notes for them to read? Just because the words would be on the screen? Why not have a bulletin insert with the actual sheet music if that would be a problem? Besides, at our church, besides for the musician and worship leader, there are three people at the most that read notes.

2) Most songs nowadays are written to high for people to sing.

"Too high" or "too low" is different for each person. The hymns get just as high - maybe higher - than most "modern" songs.

3) The format of most worship services today are that of performance, not participation.

Yeah, I can see that - at least in the Pentacostal church I was at. But our church just has a piano and a worship leader (our elder). I don't think that could be considered "performance."

I'm not opposed to changing the tunes to the hymns for performance. I do it myself, though I always keep to the tune mostly. But in corporate worship, they should use the well-known, or what were once well-known, tunes, so that we really can sing together.

Sure, for songs like "O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing" or "Amazing Grace." But what about songs like "Christian, Dost Thou See Them" or "Majestic Sweetness" that no one has heard? When we had a pastor, he often chose songs that no one knew but were theologically sound and fit the sermon. Who would be bothered then if we used a different tune? That said, I don't agree with most CCM songs being used in a worship service. Especially not with drums - although I wouldn't mind a guitar. :) But I DON'T have a problem with using these songs in personal worship or just listening to for enjoyment. Sorry if this sounded harsh or rude, I was just trying to make a point. :) (And you never replied to my comment about the Bible Bee CDs...............)

I know I'm a little more legalistic than a lot of people, but I'm willing to let a little room for others, but not myself.

Okay.

Should drums be used in the worship of God? were they used in the bible, I think this site explains it pretty well; http://psalmdrummers.org/about/drums-the-bible/ the Hebrew word 'toph' isn't incredibly definitive so we look at the cultural contexts and we see drums.
Our culture may have smeared them by their use, and we don't want to emulate the world, but that doesn't have to limit our praises to God.
Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord.

I'm not saying they can't ever be used to praise the Lord, just not the way that they are used now, they can't.

And I still have seen no biblical reference for the above statement.

There is nowhere in the Bible that defines a "godly" or "natural" beat. Thus, there is no biblical support for calling certain drumbeats "ungodly" or "unnatural." It's as simple as that.

OK, so we should take the beats that were used to cause unnatural feelings, and specifically designed for evil, to worship Satan, and use it to worship God in the same way that they worshiped their idols.

Specifically designed for evil? Even if this is true, what about this verse? "But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good…" Genesis 50:20a Just because something was designed for evil does not mean it cannot be used for good.

Internet forums such as these are often used for very bad things, I'm sure. Should we then get rid of the Memverse forums because of that? Even if Internet forums were created for terrible reasons, would we be doing wrong by making our own and using them for good purposes?

They weren't created for bad things. They are used for bad things, and we do not use them in the same way.

I don't think we should use something intended to worship Satan with to worship God. Deuteronomy 12

how do you know they where created to worship Satan?

BECAUSE I"M BATMAN!

Noah: This has gone a little to far. Would you please refrain from making those kinds of comments on the theology forums. We are trying to discuss serious matters and you keep making these ridiculous comments. Will you please stop? Thank you. I'm not trying to be harsh and I'm very sorry if I have come across harsh.

I know that they weren't created for bad things. That's why I asked the question, If they were, would it be wrong for us to use them for good? I don't think Satan or the world "owns" anything, so if we use something for the right reasons and in the right way, we aren't doing wrong–no matter for what reason the thing was originally developed.

Satan owns his worship. It cannot be used to worship God.

@Danielle- It is what the witch doctors used in their ceremonies, and it cannot be said that they were worshiping God.

So are you saying immodest clothing can also be used for good?

Yes (e.g. for washing poor people's old beat up cars, or as scraps for quilts to keep the eskimos warm).

BECAUSE I"M BATMAN!

LOL

I don't think Satan or the world "owns" anything.

What about speech Nicolas? Can our current meaning to sounds affect their goodness? This is what I mean: If the phrase "I love Satan" cannot be used to glorify God, why can the sounds of music be used either way, to glorify man or glorify God? I will tell you it is limited by your understanding. Take this phrase for an example " Ya tsak Shytolat." You don't know what this means, therefore you cannot ascribe an expected effect to it. Neither you nor Dani knows what it means, but both of you like the sound of the phrase; until Dani Googles the words, and finds out that it means "I love Satan" also! Now all of a sudden, she doesn't like it. But why? Because some one drew a connection betweeen the two meaning thus. Most likely somebody who studied the language. Now prove that the phrase was not evil. "No, that doesn't make sense, somebody a long time ago might have used those sounds for that, but we can change it! Almost no one still uses that language." If God is all knowing do you think he would be pleased by that phrase, no matter what you dressed it up as?

This may be illogical, because we do not speak with rythum, or musical notes. On the other hand we do communicate with sounds as I am sure you know. But again if God is all knowing, do you think he would be pleased by that style, no matter what you dressed it up as? I don't.

I believe you are confusing two things. God worked through the evil of Joseph's brothers when they sold him into slavery. It doesn't matter what we do, he is all powerful. It matters what we do, just because we still fit into God's design, doesn't us a free pass to sinning. Some rap may cause a man to understand the Gospel, and show him in the way to the cross. Still that is God working through the music(if wish to call it that) "No man can come to me unless I draw him." God was glorified, working through that material, but the rap may not be glorifing God, depending on its ties to other rap.

Initial intent does matter. I hope I have defended well.

By the way, I saw this, and wondered what you think. This was written by you about seven months ago. Old I know.""Putting "Christian" lyrics to the exact tune of a popular secular song, is, at best, very unwise. Christians should not make it look as if they are promoting that type of music, because we certainly should not. Anyone who knows the real lyrics to that song will likely think that the person who "Christianized" it is okay with the original song.""

How much different must a song be, to be alright? How many notes in the song must be changed, for it to be acceptable? And did I hear the words, "Type of music?"

• Cuaroc

I'm confused…