Majesty Music And Getty

[Micha-el]

John, I'd like to thank you for your voice of reason in this. Yes, I come across strong, but I see a blindness that needs to be challenged, and I think we should be able to answer direct questions. When I see a lack of logic, a wilful ignorance, an unwillingness to consider a perspective that is different to what is "comfortable", and one that is therefore to be rejected and fought against, I simply want to see if those people are capable of responding with reason.

 

In this case, clearly not.

[DaveW]

I certainly have no problem with challenging and questioning, but when you are accusatory and offensive in that challenge, then you are not doing so in a God honouring way.

Get that right and you may find you get better answers.

I do by the way agree with thought of inconsistency...........

[Micha-el]

So Dave, would you care to have a go at answering some of my questions?

[DaveW]

I actually agree with you to some extent so you are unlikely to find me defending much of the inconsistency.

There is much music that is not honouring to God though - it shouldn't be a free for all.

I actually find it interesting that often times people will suggest that classical opera is ok without understanding that the subject matter is often very immortal.

[John81]

I actually agree with you to some extent so you are unlikely to find me defending much of the inconsistency.

There is much music that is not honouring to God though - it shouldn't be a free for all.

I actually find it interesting that often times people will suggest that classical opera is ok without understanding that the subject matter is often very immortal.

Good points.

 

There is too much inconsistency to reconcile without much change. There is much music that most would agree is not honouring to God, as well as much most would agree is God honouring; it's all the rest that's in question! No doubt, there shouldn't be a "free for all" with regards to Christians and music, but then we run into the age old question of what is the dividing line, what makes one churches decisions right or wrong and others the opposite? What are matters of liberty or personal preference and what are matters of legitimate biblical concern?

 

Indeed, there are Christians who will endorse such things as classical opera which can be rather immoral, while denouncing a biblically sound song because they disagee with who wrote it, someone who sang it, a particular instrument involved, the year it was written, etc.

[Micha-el]

... the subject matter is often very immortal.

 

Or ... immoral, as the case may be!    

 

I agree, it should not be a free-for-all. First and foremost, the theology and doctrine should be carefully checked. The tunes should be singable, the melodies relatively easy to learn, in a key that will be within the range of most singers, and the music playable.

 

Do we always get it right? No, of course not, we're human and we make mistakes. If error is pointed out then it will be considered and a decision made prayerfully.

 

Here's a thought though - that set of tests above would rule out a number of hymns in the hymnal.

 

I am deeply moved in singing "And Can It Be", "There is a Fountain Filled With Blood", "Amazing Grace", "Holy, Holy, Holy", and a hymn we're singing this Sunday, "Christ Arose". I am also deeply moved in singing newer songs such as "What the Lord Has Done in Me", or "Jesus Paid it All".

 

I have often been moved to tears while singing of God's grace and mercy in Jesus covering my great debt of sin and propitiating God's wrath, which I am wholly unable to achieve through anything I do.

 

Now, if I am moved to tears by singing a hymn, or moved to tears by singing a newer song, it is a deep emotion. If God's grace and forgiveness and love and justice and wrath does not move you to tears at least occasionally, then I pray you will find yourself so moved.

 

What I read here is that some contributors seem so terrified of something new, they insulate themselves against it by convincing themselves they are right, everyone else is wrong, and they are right because they can line up their position with Scripture. Interesting that I use the same verses to support my position, it's just a matter of perspective, and context.

 

I'm off to practise the songs for this Lord's Day, which incidentally you can find here: The Gospel On Guitar's YouTube Playlist for March 31, 2013. By the way, we don't aim to slavishly copy the versions I link to, they are simply a general guide to help our singers and musicians get familiar with the songs during the week before they come to practise.

 

Regards,

 

Michael

[DaveW]

Autocorrect on the phone.........

:D

[Invicta]

Or ... immoral, as the case may be!  

 

I agree, it should not be a free-for-all. First and foremost, the theology and doctrine should be carefully checked. The tunes should be singable, the melodies relatively easy to learn, in a key that will be within the range of most singers, and the music playable.

 

Do we always get it right? No, of course not, we're human and we make mistakes. If error is pointed out then it will be considered and a decision made prayerfully.

 

Here's a thought though - that set of tests above would rule out a number of hymns in the hymnal.

 

I am deeply moved in singing "And Can It Be", "There is a Fountain Filled With Blood", "Amazing Grace", "Holy, Holy, Holy", and a hymn we're singing this Sunday, "Christ Arose". I am also deeply moved in singing newer songs such as "What the Lord Has Done in Me", or "Jesus Paid it All".

 

I have often been moved to tears while singing of God's grace and mercy in Jesus covering my great debt of sin and propitiating God's wrath, which I am wholly unable to achieve through anything I do.

 

Now, if I am moved to tears by singing a hymn, or moved to tears by singing a newer song, it is a deep emotion. If God's grace and forgiveness and love and justice and wrath does not move you to tears at least occasionally, then I pray you will find yourself so moved.

 

What I read here is that some contributors seem so terrified of something new, they insulate themselves against it by convincing themselves they are right, everyone else is wrong, and they are right because they can line up their position with Scripture. Interesting that I use the same verses to support my position, it's just a matter of perspective, and context.

 

I'm off to practise the songs for this Lord's Day, which incidentally you can find here: The Gospel On Guitar's YouTube Playlist for March 31, 2013. By the way, we don't aim to slavishly copy the versions I link to, they are simply a general guide to help our singers and musicians get familiar with the songs during the week before they come to practise.

 

Regards,

 

Michael

 

Well I watched a bit of the first video and I saw no reverence for God there, just entertainment.  He also seemed to have forgotten the tune.

[Micha-el]

Well I watched a bit of the first video and I saw no reverence for God there, just entertainment.  He also seemed to have forgotten the tune.

 

Ad hominem. Invalid. Petty. Childish.

 

David was criticised for dancing for joy. Go ahead and criticise God's people for not being perfect, but be careful how you deal with the bride of Christ. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

 

Or will you say anyone outside your tradition is not part of Christ's church, his bride? Brave. Very brave. Braver than I.

[JerryNumbers]

Yes, one standard in one church, another standard in the next, different standards in other churches, different standards in the city, country, black churches, white churches, Korean churches, African churches, rich churches, poor churches, etc.

 

Even if we narrow it down to just Baptist churches there is no one set standard. I've been to Baptist churches with similar standards, but none the same, and often there can be a great deal of difference between standards from one Baptist church to the next.

 

The debate over Christians and music has gone on for centuries and no set standards have ever emerged. We see the same thing today, not only in Christianity overall, but even among IFBs.

 

 

Each true New Testament Church is Independent of all other true New Testament Churches. I'm sure out there scattered across the country there be those that uses the same standard. But they never try to Lord over, or force their ways, or tell other churches what to do.

[Micha-el]

Well I watched a bit of the first video and I saw no reverence for God there, just entertainment.  He also seemed to have forgotten the tune.

 

While you're criticising God's people for not doing things as well as you would (please feel free to tell us about your amazing musical abilities, particularly in a live recording), you might like to correct your signature text. There is only one "r" in "Corinthians", and "stumblingblock" is two words, not one. 

[JerryNumbers]

Jerry, your tactic of avoiding the question is stunning in its effectiveness.

 

Can you answer the question: what makes the Amish wrong, in their rejection of your level of worldliness, and what make your level of worldliness acceptable?

 

No, I answered your, you just do not like the answer. 

 

As for the Amish question, carry it to another topic, the topic here is: Replying to Majesty Music And Getty.

[Micha-el]

Each true New Testament Church is Independent of all other true New Testament Churches. I'm sure out there scattered across the country there be those that uses the same standard. But they never try to Lord over, or force their ways, or tell other churches what to do.

 

.. and yet you've spent a lot of time here telling people like me we're doing it wrong. If you could, I'm pretty sure you would force your way on my church, and tell us what to do.

 

Inconsistent much?

 

 

 

No, I answered your, you just do not like the answer. 

 

As for the Amish question, carry it to another topic, the topic here is: Replying to Majesty Music And Getty.

 

No, that is exactly the point here. You have asserted that using music that doesn't line up with your standards is bringing worldliness into the church, which you have identified as the real issue at stake in this question of including Getty music in the Majesty hymnal.

 

Please define "worldliness", or admit you can't. If you can't, then stop pretending to know God's will in these things.

 

The Amish question relates DIRECTLY to this topic. If you (or anyone else supporting your position) cannot see that your inconsistent application of the concept of worldliness is tied directly to your personal social construct, to your traditions, and that what you see as "acceptable" would be condemned by others even more conservative than you (e.g., the Amish), then your opinion in the matter of acceptable music in the church universal can be summarily dismissed as being without foundation.

 

Feel free to impose your tradition and social construct within the walls of the local church where you are surrounded by like-minded people, but please try to see the point that not all people around the world worship God in the same way you do (and nor should they be expected to, nor be directed to).

[ASongOfDegrees]

Doesn't music fall under the "let ever man be fully persuaded in his own mind" category? (Romans 14:5) Especially since music is fluid and always changing throughout history and the various cultures? 

[Micha-el]

Doesn't music fall under the "let ever man be fully persuaded in his own mind" category? (Romans 14:5) Especially since music is fluid and always changing throughout history and the various cultures? 

 

 

And there it is.