Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Recommending West Coast?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Seth,

You make my point and you didn't realize it.

We can disagree and though you might never attend a church I pastor, we can still associate and be cordial to each other. Cloud doesn't hold to that position. If you disagree with him, you are a wicked sinner who needs to be separated from.

Though I don't agree with you on some things, I think you are probably a Godly person who loves the Lord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We can disagree and though you might never attend a church I pastor, we can still associate and be cordial to each other. Cloud doesn't hold to that position. If you disagree with him, you are a wicked sinner who needs to be separated from.


Proof? I haven't seen anything that would lead me to think that is an accurate portrayal. On top of that concerning this particular issue I haven't seen a single thing where he has said anything like "IFB's should separate from West Coast". All I have seen is that he criticized West Coasts musical direction/musical leadership and said it concerned him as he thought it is and has been heading in the wrong direction. The mere fact that he "had the nerve" to criticize a "good" school about anything got a surprising number of people up in arms. To me such criticism is hardly the end of the world and people can agree with it or ignore it as they choose, it is just out there as a caution and consideration. There is a sentiment held by some that I totally disagree with, it essentially amounts to if you think someone or some group out there is "generally" one of the "good guys" you should never criticize them about anything. That sentiment is contrary to this scripture: "Proverbs 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.". Instead it basically comes from a point of view that says if your truly a friend you never criticize or "wound" at all unless things have gotten so bad you must now become enemies. There is a well established biblical precedent of criticizing and standing against even those who are generally the "good guys" when they sin or show poor judgement.

Just one quick example of many:

"2 Chronicles 20:37 Then Eliezer the son of Dodavah of Mareshah prophesied against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the LORD hath broken thy works. And the ships were broken, that they were not able to go to Tarshish."

Jehoshaphat was a pretty good king for the most part, and I suppose some IFB's would be upset if this situation occurred today because "everybody" would know that he was a good king with a good heart that the prophet should support instead of criticize. He just had the "minor" problem that he was always forming associations with people and kingdoms he shouldn't have. Take this example, there was nothing wrong with building ships to go to Tarshish, but he had no business forming a partnership with the wicked king Ahaziah. None of these associations seriously hurt Jehoshaphat himself, he just had minor difficulties and punishments like this one come out of it and remained a generally good king till he died. However his son and heir Jehoram grew up around this compromise and took things even further than he did. His son married into the wicked line of Ahab, and murdered all of Jehoshaphat's other sons destroying any potential "good fruit". That was the harvest from the seeds of some of the "minor" compromises Jehoshaphat did. The same thing happens in churches and schools. Questionable things are brought in or done, some call them "minor" things because they don't necessarily destroy everything good right away, but slowly and surely the seeds start coming up and in the passage of time you end up closer and closer to a kingdom of Jehoram and farther and farther from the kingdom of Jehoshaphat you once had.


It also seems a little ironic that you criticize cloud(which is fine if you disagree) for "separating" over what you consider to be minor issues and then say things like this: "he has become an extremist that I for one will not read, though I probably agree with him far more than I would disagree." In short it seems you yourself are criticizing and "separating" from him because you think he criticizes and "separates" from others over "minor" issues to often. I find that a little bit humorous. :biggrin: Edited by Seth-Doty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Seth,

I have given a Biblical position on why Mr. Cloud is wrong in his attack on West Coast. You refuse to accept a Scriptural view. This particular issue is not clear in Scripture. Though there are many clear principles of music found in the Bible, one man's definition of CCM and another can vary. An example that I have already given is Ron Hamilton. There are extremists in the IFB world that say that Ron Hamilton's music is CCM. I for one would not put Ron Hamilon in that group. Some would define CCM as anything written in the last 50 years. Again, another Extremist position.

As to Separation. I have not separated from Mr. Cloud. I choose not to read his material. If he came to my church, I would still go to church and shake his hand. I don't have time this morning to explain Biblical separation. If I need to, let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Seth,

I have given a Biblical position on why Mr. Cloud is wrong in his attack on West Coast. You refuse to accept a Scriptural view. This particular issue is not clear in Scripture. Though there are many clear principles of music found in the Bible, one man's definition of CCM and another can vary. An example that I have already given is Ron Hamilton. There are extremists in the IFB world that say that Ron Hamilton's music is CCM. I for one would not put Ron Hamilon in that group. Some would define CCM as anything written in the last 50 years. Again, another Extremist position.

As to Separation. I have not separated from Mr. Cloud. I choose not to read his material. If he came to my church, I would still go to church and shake his hand. I don't have time this morning to explain Biblical separation. If I need to, let me know.

I understand what you are trying to say. Scritpure doesn't clearly dictate what is and isn't acceptable Christian music. There are some general principles we can apply, but they are general, not specific, and do not cover every aspect we encounter.

For instance, some today denounce any Christian music put forth by someone who has any connection with worldly music. Most of these endorse and sing the hymns of Fanny Crosby even though she herself wrote many secular songs, some of which were even played in minstrel shows.

In areas of music there is much more room for "tolerance" (in the claccis sense, not the modern) than there is if we were discussing a clear doctrinal issue. I can embrace as a brother in Christ one who listens to music I may disagree with while I could not do so with a guy who believes one must do some sort of work to be saved. While I may not be willing to attend a church which plays certain music, if the members are born again believers, I can have a measure of fellowship/friendship with them outside the church.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About West Coast...We are acquainted with some great men who are on staff there. We especially love John Goetsch. We count Bryan Samms as a friend also. My husband and his family have been to the school, have talked in depth with Bro. Chappell, have attended services and mingled with the college kids at various times. My daughter's camp counselor (who did a super job) was a West Coast student.

Our family/church is on the VERY conservative end of the music spectrum. We do not listen to southern gospel at all, and Patch the Pirate does not flow freely, either, although we allow our kids to listen to much of his stuff. All of this said, my husband's take on the music on the West Coast platform could be summed up in one word: hokey. He said it's definitely not CCM, but it could lean toward the southern gospel end of things. The chapel services seem a bit "showy" and man-centered. (The students applaud as the administration files in and sits down, for example...nothing "wrong" with that, per se, but it's part of the atmosphere that directs attention to men, not God.)

My husband and I have talked...We don't think we'd ever send our kids to West Coast--mainly because of the strong KJVO stand. (At the graduation ceremony, the graduates have to promise that if they ever preach from any other version than the KJV, they will turn in their diplomas and forfeit their degree. :icon_rolleyes: ) And, the music there is a factor, too, and the whole "feeling" of being man-centered (the large portrait of Jack Hyles in their "hall of faith" adds to this feeling), but I agree with those who say that David Cloud is overreacting in this instance.

Edited by Annie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About West Coast...We are acquainted with some great men who are on staff there. We especially love John Goetsch. We count Bryan Samms as a friend also. My husband and his family have been to the school, have talked in depth with Bro. Chappell, have attended services and mingled with the college kids at various times. My daughter's camp counselor (who did a super job) was a West Coast student.

Our family/church is on the VERY conservative end of the music spectrum. We do not listen to southern gospel at all, and Patch the Pirate does not flow freely, either, although we allow our kids to listen to much of his stuff. All of this said, my husband's take on the music on the West Coast platform could be summed up in one word: hokey. He said it's definitely not CCM, but it could lean toward the southern gospel end of things. The chapel services seem a bit "showy" and man-centered. (The students applaud as the administration files in and sits down, for example...nothing "wrong" with that, per se, but it's part of the atmosphere that directs attention to men, not God.)

My husband and I have talked...We don't think we'd ever send our kids to West Coast--mainly because of the strong KJVO stand. (At the graduation ceremony, the graduates have to promise that if they ever preach from any other version than the KJV, they will turn in their diplomas and forfeit their degree. :icon_rolleyes: ) And, the music there is a factor, too, and the whole "feeling" of being man-centered (the large portrait of Jack Hyles in their "hall of faith" adds to this feeling), but I agree with those who say that David Cloud is overreacting in this instance.

Thank you for sharing your insights.

It's actually a shame to see so many IFBs forming into "camps" and worse yet that each camp will denounce aspects they disagree with in other camps, but within their own camp they are often too willing to overlook things they should speak out about simply for the sake of keeping those currently in the camp from departing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About West Coast...We are acquainted with some great men who are on staff there. We especially love John Goetsch. We count Bryan Samms as a friend also. My husband and his family have been to the school, have talked in depth with Bro. Chappell, have attended services and mingled with the college kids at various times. My daughter's camp counselor (who did a super job) was a West Coast student.

Our family/church is on the VERY conservative end of the music spectrum. We do not listen to southern gospel at all, and Patch the Pirate does not flow freely, either, although we allow our kids to listen to much of his stuff. All of this said, my husband's take on the music on the West Coast platform could be summed up in one word: hokey. He said it's definitely not CCM, but it could lean toward the southern gospel end of things. The chapel services seem a bit "showy" and man-centered. (The students applaud as the administration files in and sits down, for example...nothing "wrong" with that, per se, but it's part of the atmosphere that directs attention to men, not God.)

My husband and I have talked...We don't think we'd ever send our kids to West Coast--mainly because of the strong KJVO stand. (At the graduation ceremony, the graduates have to promise that if they ever preach from any other version than the KJV, they will turn in their diplomas and forfeit their degree. :icon_rolleyes: ) And, the music there is a factor, too, and the whole "feeling" of being man-centered (the large portrait of Jack Hyles in their "hall of faith" adds to this feeling), but I agree with those who say that David Cloud is overreacting in this instance.


Annie,

Have you ever researched the reason fundamentalists only use the KJV? I think it's worth the look (it's not only new words or missing verses but the actual manuscripts that they are translated from that are corrupt). You don't have to respond fully, just yes or no but maybe we can start another discussion. I think those that use the newer versions imply (not knowingly most of the time) that God is a liar because He didn't keep His Word preserved and we had to "improve" upon it with "better" manuscripts that weren't found until recently.

:11backtotopic:
I agree with the clapping, that sounds a little odd...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The KJB has a 400 year proven track record. That should speak volumnes in itself!

Another thing that should speak volumnes is that those who come up with one MV after another proclaim that there is no Bible out there that is fully the Word of God, that all are riddled with error, that the latest MV isn't the preserved and perfect Word of God and that newer editions will be needed in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Have you ever researched the reason fundamentalists only use the KJV? I think it's worth the look (it's not only new words or missing verses but the actual manuscripts that they are translated from that are corrupt). You don't have to respond fully, just yes or no but maybe we can start another discussion. I think those that use the newer versions imply (not knowingly most of the time) that God is a liar because He didn't keep His Word preserved and we had to "improve" upon it with "better" manuscripts that weren't found until recently.

Yes, I have looked into it. I don't think we're allowed to discuss the topic on this board, though. (I can't participate in the "IFB forum" since I'm not KJVO, and that's the only place KJV discussions are allowed.)

:11backtotopic:
I agree with the clapping, that sounds a little odd...

Yeah...My brother-in-law actually talked to Paul Chappell about that a couple of months ago. Bro. Chappell was gracious about it, but it probably won't change. My husband didn't really know how to put it into words, but he didn't care for the whole "feel" of the place. The admin. and students are sweet, but the whole setup isn't something we'd want for our kids to be influenced by. As John alluded to earlier, it's a different "stripe" of fundamentalism than we're comfortable with. We would never "denounce" them just because they disagree with us, though. It is sad how people take it upon themselves to enforce their own personal standards, opinions, and convictions about matters of application on everyone else. Edited by Annie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About West Coast...We are acquainted with some great men who are on staff there. We especially love John Goetsch. We count Bryan Samms as a friend also. My husband and his family have been to the school, have talked in depth with Bro. Chappell, have attended services and mingled with the college kids at various times. My daughter's camp counselor (who did a super job) was a West Coast student.

Our family/church is on the VERY conservative end of the music spectrum. We do not listen to southern gospel at all, and Patch the Pirate does not flow freely, either, although we allow our kids to listen to much of his stuff. All of this said, my husband's take on the music on the West Coast platform could be summed up in one word: hokey. He said it's definitely not CCM, but it could lean toward the southern gospel end of things. The chapel services seem a bit "showy" and man-centered. (The students applaud as the administration files in and sits down, for example...nothing "wrong" with that, per se, but it's part of the atmosphere that directs attention to men, not God.)

My husband and I have talked...We don't think we'd ever send our kids to West Coast--mainly because of the strong KJVO stand. (At the graduation ceremony, the graduates have to promise that if they ever preach from any other version than the KJV, they will turn in their diplomas and forfeit their degree. :icon_rolleyes: ) And, the music there is a factor, too, and the whole "feeling" of being man-centered (the large portrait of Jack Hyles in their "hall of faith" adds to this feeling), but I agree with those who say that David Cloud is overreacting in this instance.


That's interesting that you take such a strong stand on music but not on the word of God. Not criticizing you at all, I just think it's interesting. Ya’ll come from BJU, right?

My family loves Patch the Pirate and we listen to the conservative side of Southern Gospel, on the flip side I hold to the KJB over everything including what remains of the original languages. I'm guessing your family and mine could have some interesting conversations. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's interesting that you take such a strong stand on music but not on the word of God. Not criticizing you at all, I just think it's interesting. Ya’ll come from BJU, right?

My family loves Patch the Pirate and we listen to the conservative side of Southern Gospel, on the flip side I hold to the KJB over everything including what remains of the original languages. I'm guessing your family and mine could have some interesting conversations. :)

I guess I'd say that we (both you and I) take a "strong stand" on everything...or else maybe I don't understand what you mean by a strong stand. We stand for truth, you and I, right? We each take Scripture, our knowledge of culture, discernment, etc., and come to different conclusions...but I wouldn't call your stand on music "weak," and I hope you wouldn't call my stand on Scripture "weak." I stand strongly on the opinion (formed by reading Scripture, studying manuscript history/ancient languages, etc.) that the KJV is not the only reliable version out there....so, it's a "strong" stand that you might think is mistaken, but it isn't a "weak" stand. I'm sure you stand strong for what you believe is right, and I do, too. (Don't know if that made any sense at all...Just figuring out what you mean. You can probably explain it better than I just did.) I think I was using "strong" in my post in a different way than you're using "strong"...A "strong KJVO" stand, means that the school is "strongly KJVO," as opposed to our family/church, who is "strongly non-KJVO." I think I'm just making things worse...I'll shut up now. :)

Sure, we'd have some great conversations. I don't know any of our friends or family members who believe just like we do on everything; even our best friends don't. And we have fun and learn a lot by batting around ideas now and then.

My husband and I did graduate from BJU, but we don't agree with everything we heard there, either. We're just not into being cookie cutter Christians, I guess. :) Edited by Annie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Seth,

I have given a Biblical position on why Mr. Cloud is wrong in his attack on West Coast. You refuse to accept a Scriptural view.


I admit you claiming that I "refuse to accept a scriptural view" brings up the rather fleshly desire to list a whole pile of supporting verses for no nobler reason than "self justification" and to "prove" you wrong. :blink: It is never particularly helpful to post things even if they are the truth in the flesh though. Would sort of defeat the purpose of arguing with you. :biggrin: The scriptures are there for those who search them out as hid treasures and I do feel I am holding to the biblical position. I don't think any other comment is necessary.

As to Separation. I have not separated from Mr. Cloud. I choose not to read his material. If he came to my church, I would still go to church and shake his hand. I don't have time this morning to explain Biblical separation. If I need to, let me know.


I agree that choosing not to read his materials would not be biblical "separation" as I would personally choose to define it. It did however seem that that was how you were defining it when you said that cloud "separated" from everyone that didn't agree with him. Apparently because he publicly criticized those he disagreed with on the issue he disagrees with them on even though he might agree with them in many other areas. It seemed as if you were either leveling over the top unsubstantiated accusations(depending on how you personally define separation) out of irritation or were doing pretty much exactly the same thing you didn't want someone else to do.

Sort of like when some IFB's claim that music standards cannot be taken from the bible and that it is wrong to "criticize" someone over CCM yet all the while they themselves will "criticize" those with more liberal views than their own who not only don't mind some "mild" CCM but also don't mind "Christian rock", "Christian rap", or what not. In practice it often tends to be more of an issue with the fact that they themselves are not uncomfortable with "mild" CCM and yet are still uncomfortable with the "harder" forms of bad music rather than them truly believing God doesn't care about the music Christians use and listen to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I guess I'd say that we (both you and I) take a "strong stand" on everything...or else maybe I don't understand what you mean by a strong stand. We stand for truth, you and I, right? We each take Scripture, our knowledge of culture, discernment, etc., and come to different conclusions...but I wouldn't call your stand on music "weak," and I hope you wouldn't call my stand on Scripture "weak." I stand strongly on the opinion (formed by reading Scripture, studying manuscript history/ancient languages, etc.) that the KJV is not the only reliable version out there....so, it's a "strong" stand that you might think is mistaken, but it isn't a "weak" stand. I'm sure you stand strong for what you believe is right, and I do, too. (Don't know if that made any sense at all...Just figuring out what you mean. You can probably explain it better than I just did.) I think I was using "strong" in my post in a different way than you're using "strong"...A "strong KJVO" stand, means that the school is "strongly KJVO," as opposed to our family/church, who is "strongly non-KJVO." I think I'm just making things worse...I'll shut up now. :)


Could you more fully explain what you mean by "the KJV is not the only reliable version out there"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...