What is wrong with Christian Contemporary Music and Rock?

[Guest Guest]

Unless the NT states some specific aspect of the OT law is done away with' date=' then it still applies - whether directly or by principle. Yes, some things are pictures - and it takes studying to find out exactly what and how it pictures. What is the principle regarding forbidding tattooing and piercings? Not to be like the world/pagans around us. Still applies directly today - and that would directly include not getting tattoos or piercings like the world. So as a principle or a direct command, it still applices to us.[/quote']

Yes, I agree most with this post, Jerry. In fact, this is probably about the most we've ever agreed on anything. That is ... slightly scary, no? :frog



Yeah, I knew that - my sarcasm is not translated very well in writing. It was a failed attempt at humor...

While most of what I said did have pictures of what was to come or a following judgment, the fact remains that they were still laws. Granted, most of them were there for sanitary reasons and cleanliness. You and I both know that we could comb the book of Leviticus and could come up with several, if not dozens, of cultural rules or laws that are completely inapplicable in today's church. Now, as Jerry had stated, the principle may still apply, but drawing a direct line because of the wording in Leviticus may not be the best interpretation of that principle.

For an example of interpreting principles, let's look at clothing. I wonder, what with all the many passages on what the priests were to wear, what did the other peoples (not of Israel) wear? Were the styles the same, or was there some notable difference? Obviously, there was a difference between what the priests and the and the other children of Israel wore. To me, this principle is the one that best carries over to today's society. We are saved and we believe in the "priesthood of the believer", therefore we are held to a higher standard - just like the priests in the OT times. I do, however, think it would be ridiculous to have the exact same attire (a direct line rule) that the priests were required to wear, just because it is worded that way in the Old Testament. Did any of that make sense? (did I just hi-jack a thread?) The real issue is taking a Biblical principle (OT or NT) and applying it to the modern church with consideration to its surrounding culture: to allow the principle to change lines without compromising truth. I think this is commonly referred to as cultural relevance, and because of its abuse, it has been deemed a bad thing. It was, however, the basis for the human aspect of Jesus' earthly ministry.

There. Now you can take the same thought process and apply it to music, before we totally derail this thread. :smile

[Behold the Lamb]

So we should just give the lost what they know to reach them?

Nope. You give them what they don't know in a way that they will actually receive.

How about a Bible with scantily clad pictures of half-naked women on the cover?

No, that would be perverse.

How about a beer and pretzels Bible study night?

Nope, drinking alcohol is wrong. Pretzels are okay.

God wants believers to be separated from evil - not imitate it "to reach the lost."

What you fail to realize is that being separated from the world is all about the condition of the heart, the state of mind, the intent, the purpose, the holiness, and the love for Jesus Christ, and nothing to do with outward appearances. Music is only a vehicle. Saying that music of a particular sound is always wrong because there's a lot of songs that have horrible words attached to the sound is like saying it's wrong to wear all t-shirts (including the ones with John 3:16 on them) because there are some t-shirts with lude imagery and foul language.

What a ridiculous excuse! There have been many studies shown that these rock or country groups in CCM that are compromising on their standards and lyrics - lowering the bar - to reach the lost are fooling themselves because it is professing Christians (not the lost) that are buying their albums.

If anyone does that, that's wrong. But don't paint a broad stroke. I know people who got saved listening to a Casting Crowns song, and I know of people that got saved at a Skillet concert, and I can name people right now that have just now come to the point of making a commitment to God because for the past few months they've been listening to CCM and CR, and through that, God has slowly been working on their hearts.

Is there? When they sound the same and look the same, your philosophy goes out the window.

And that right there is the problem with the church today. We're so concerned with making sure everyone looks right in the sight of men, that we've totally lost the concept of being right. We've almost said to an entire generation in the church, "We don't care if you are right. We just want to make sure you look right." And what's looking right to us? Well, let's just say Jesus and John the Baptist wouldn't be allowed in a lot of churches today because they wouldn't look right.

God's looking for hearts, not three-piece suits, dresses, a 50's combover, and the ability to play the same songs on the piano and sing the same songs that our great grandparents played and sang. The hymns we sing today weren't always accepted either, you know.

God is not pleased by men's traditions and ideas and man's own wisdom in regards to what is "right".

When they have mosh pits in Christian concerts - they are not different.

Which is why some friends and I left a "Christian" concert shouting "ICHABOD!" at the top of our lungs back in November. At the same time, I question the wisdom of that now--I wonder if some of those people in that mosh pit went there for totally the wrong reasons (just wanting to "rock out") but may pick up the CD and be influenced by the lyrics later on? I mean, I wanted the lost and the unsaved to be there. Okay, they were. Then I got upset because they weren't automatically transformed, and still acted like they were lost and unsaved. What can you expect from sinners? Sin. So I'm questioning the wisdom of my reaction to that. If it had been professing Christians doing it, on the other hand...that's a different story.

But that's the only Christian concert I've ever experienced a "mosh" pit at. The [numerous] others ones I've been to had hands lifted all over the building, people crying, people getting saved, and people singing in worship to God. You cannot paint a broad stroke against CCM/CR just because there's some black sheep, just like you can't paint all preachers as bad just because there's some black sheep.

When they water down their lyrics "to reach the lost", they are not glorifying God OR even reaching the lost.

Not all of them do that. But for the ones that do, well? Sometimes that can be a good thing, depending on how it's done. You don't feed a baby meat. You start with milk, then you slowly work them up to meat.

Can't win the souls of the lost without the Word of God. When the lost come to a supposed "Christian" concert, hear the music they are used to with vague feel-good lyrics, see the male singers with long hair and grunge clothing, and see the female singers with butch hair and skimpy clothing - all the while sporting tattoos - I don't believe you are having an impact on the lost. All I see is a justification for Christians to stay worldly.

Skimpy clothing is totally wrong. I've never been to a Christian concert where any of the females sported skimpy or sexual clothing--they have always been very modest. I have no problem with the rest of it (except tattoos, which are debatable), because against, being not of this world is not about outward appearance (as long as it is not sinful).

Worldliness is a mindset, a lifestyle, and a condition of the heart. To be not of this world is a glorious way of living that leads a man to lay down his life for Christ (even if his hair is shoulder length, and even if he is wearing somewhat ragged jeans and a t-shirt--trust me, John the Baptist was way worse off), that leads a girl like Rachel Joy Scott of Columbine--who often wore jeans and not skirts based on her pictures--to die for refusing to renounce the name of Jesus Christ. To be not of this world is to be in love with Jesus Christ and to live for Him, and not about being able to dress like a good church goer.

It just saddens me that so many of us have taken this attitude to people who have devoted their lives to the cause of Christ, because they dress more like I'd expect John the Baptist to than they do like I'd expect the religious people of Jesus' time to have dressed. The church still makes the same mistake the Pharisees and Saducees made in that we still put more of an emphasis on outward appearances than we do on the heart--except now we call ourselves Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, and so on and so forth.

[Guest Guest]

I have not been able to get on-line in a few days...but, Jerry...thank you for saying this. The world/pagans is a very accurate assessment here! :thumb Also, thank you to the post below Vir's post. too!

VIr...I look at this as an abomination against God! And, children see this as well. Ask your "average" youngster or teenager (saved or unsaved) and, they will certainly tell you that something just isn't right about the look of a "nose-piercing" by a Christian who has been following Christ for many years? I don't get it?...And, I wasn't raised in a Christian home. I was, however, raised in a RCC home with good, moral values, though. My parents were/are against this type of look...especially, from a Christian. The biggest problem I have with RM and CCM...is that "it is smoke under the door". Just a little dabble into something will allow the enemy to get "full-control", eventually. If you let in "creep in it will". And, Christians start getting tattoos as well? IMO, this does NOT glorify the Lord Jesus Christ...at all. :sad There are 2 reasons that a person comes to know JC as their "personal Saviour"...either, they know a Christian or they don't.

candlelight

[Jerry]

How about a Bible with scantily clad pictures of half-naked women on the cover?

No, that would be perverse.

What you fail to realize is that being separated from the world is all about the condition of the heart, the state of mind, the intent, the purpose, the holiness, and the love for Jesus Christ, and nothing to do with outward appearances.

You just contradicted yourself. First you say something would be wrong, then you say God doesn't care about that. This passage is not saying God is not concerned with outward appearances - as that actually would contradict various passages in the Bible itself (such as those dealing with attire, hair lenghts, tattooes and piercings, etc.):

1 Samuel 16:7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.

What it says is that God's criteria for using people is not dependant upon their physical status, looks, height, etc. Big difference there.

[Behold the Lamb]

You just contradicted yourself. First you say something would be wrong, then you say God doesn't care about that. This passage is not saying God is not concerned with outward appearances - as that actually would contradict various passages in the Bible itself (such as those dealing with attire, hair lenghts, tattooes and piercings, etc.):

1 Samuel 16:7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.

What it says is that God's criteria for using people is not dependant upon their physical status, looks, height, etc. Big difference there.

Obviously, if it's sinful, it's wrong. When I say "God doesn't care about outward appearances", I mean that God doesn't care about whether or not we adhere to religious people's idea of appropriate outward appearances.

There's a big difference between a girl who is wearing a mini skirt that is barely there and a girl wearing a pair of (non-tight) jeans. The mini skirt is wrong because it promotes sexual immorality and goes against the commandments of God. The jeans are wrong because religious people say they are wrong.

As far as hair length goes, I'm not going to get into an argument over that, but that scripture has been grossly misconstrued and I don't think we realize that there is a huge difference between our modern idea of what constitutes "long hair" on a man and the 1st century idea of that. It's really not something worth arguing over. It's just another thing we use to avoid having to actually deal with the true plumbline--the heart.

[HappyChristian]

It's just another thing we use to avoid having to actually deal with the true plumbline--the heart.

[offtopic]What's in the heart comes out, Behold. The verse you quoted about God looking on the heart is twofold. God does look on the heart. And we are to be concerned about that. The issues of our life come from our hearts. And that is where the rest of the verse comes in. Man sees the outward. And man judges by the outward externals, whether we like it or not. If a person is right with God, the external will show it.

but that scripture has been grossly misconstrued and I don't think we realize that there is a huge difference between our modern idea of what constitutes "long hair" on a man and the 1st century idea of that

yep, you're right, it's been grossly misconstrued = by those who want men to be excused for wearing long hair. Sorry, but our modern idea of what constitutes long hair on a man is basically the same as the 1st century. Check out the busts from that time period. All of the men had hair above their ears and collars. That's the way it was.

And, nope - there are men who are more turned on by a woman in jeans (even loose) than a woman in a mini skirt. So that argument doesn't hold water. And all of this is off-topic, sorry... :Green[/offtopic]

[Guest Guest]

Good afternoon, LuAnne...Good points! :thumb Your post is really NOT that "off topic", though...b/c what you mentioned does actually go hand in hand.

candlelight

[Jerry]

P.S. Meat is referring to indepth things of the Word of God - not straightforward preaching. The lost and baby Christians should be given the plain, straightforward Word of God - not something watered down. You can't save someone by watered down lyrics - you need to clearly present the Gospel in order to have fruit from it. If you water down the Gospel, you won't get anyone saved - AND YES, most CCM contains watered down lyrics, most have unclear or questionable (if not outright false) doctrine, and most doesn't even use the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - they say, He, Him, God, the One, etc. - but rarely mention Jesus Christ in a clear manner that glorifies Him.

[Guest Guest]

P.S. Meat is referring to indepth things of the Word of God - not straightforward preaching. The lost and baby Christians should be given the plain' date=' straightforward Word of God - not something watered down. You can't save someone by watered down lyrics - you need to clearly present the Gospel in order to have fruit from it. If you water down the Gospel, you won't get anyone saved - AND YES, most CCM contains watered down lyrics, most have unclear or questionable (if not outright false) doctrine, and most doesn't even use the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - they say, He, Him, God, the One, etc. - but rarely mention Jesus Christ in a clear manner that glorifies Him.[/quote']

Or...and, this is the most offensive to me, "The man upstairs".

candlelight

[Behold the Lamb]

[offtopic]What's in the heart comes out, Behold. The verse you quoted about God looking on the heart is twofold. God does look on the heart. And we are to be concerned about that. The issues of our life come from our hearts. And that is where the rest of the verse comes in. Man sees the outward. And man judges by the outward externals, whether we like it or not. If a person is right with God, the external will show it.

Their actions will show it, not the way they dress. And you know what? I've been to churches where all the kids dressed "right", and most of them would be trying to get out of the door by the time the altar call began, and if any of them did go to the altar, it was for about 30 seconds. On the other hand, I've been to churches where kids dressed wrong (guys had hair that went to their shoulders, wore t-shirts and blue jeans, girls wore pants, etc.), and I'd hear those kids asking the preacher to keep preaching when he said he was about to wrap up, and they wouldn't just be at the altar during the altar call. And when the altar call came, they would stay there on their knees and on their faces crying out to God with tears streaming down their faces, and they would still be there long after the preacher had left the building, crying out to Jesus Christ.

And you know what? These are the same kids that stand in front of abortion clinics on Saturdays all day long witnessing to broken women, praying for babies, and asking God to change the hearts of this nation. My old church, where all the teens "dressed right", refused to participate with these churches in the fight against abortion because they looked different.

These are the same kids that go into the streets of New Orleans at Mardi Gras (and when I say kids, I usually mean 16-early 20s) witnessing to all the messed up people that most church people are scared to death to talk to Jesus about (like flaming homosexuals and strippers, for example).

But we all know that they aren't really Christians, because they don't dress like our traditions say they should!

God help us.

And, nope - there are men who are more turned on by a woman in jeans (even loose) than a woman in a mini skirt. So that argument doesn't hold water. And all of this is off-topic, sorry... :Green[/offtopic]

[HappyChristian]

Their actions will show it, not the way they dress. And you know what? I've been to churches where all the kids dressed "right", and most of them would be trying to get out of the door by the time the altar call began, and if any of them did go to the altar, it was for about 30 seconds. On the other hand, I've been to churches where kids dressed wrong (guys had hair that went to their shoulders, wore t-shirts and blue jeans, girls wore pants, etc.), and I'd hear those kids asking the preacher to keep preaching when he said he was about to wrap up, and they wouldn't just be at the altar during the altar call. And when the altar call came, they would stay there on their knees and on their faces crying out to God with tears streaming down their faces, and they would still be there long after the preacher had left the building, crying out to Jesus Christ.

And you know what? These are the same kids that stand in front of abortion clinics on Saturdays all day long witnessing to broken women, praying for babies, and asking God to change the hearts of this nation. My old church, where all the teens "dressed right", refused to participate with these churches in the fight against abortion because they looked different.

These are the same kids that go into the streets of New Orleans at Mardi Gras (and when I say kids, I usually mean 16-early 20s) witnessing to all the messed up people that most church people are scared to death to talk to Jesus about (like flaming homosexuals and strippers, for example).

But we all know that they aren't really Christians, because they don't dress like our traditions say they should!

God help us.

I've heard more girls and seen more girls going on about the way a man's backside looks in a pair of pants than I have heard guys saying the same thing about a girl. Should men start wearing kilts?

OR, should our churches start teaching its men [and women, because they do it too, plenty] not to be perverts?

[Behold the Lamb]

I really don't know where you've been if the churches you've been in haven't taught people not to be perverts. I've heard girls talk about that too, and it is just as disgusting from them as it is guys. Works both ways.

I've always felt like a lot of the churches I grew up in just gave up on their guys as a lost cause and forced the girls to work extra hard because they didn't know what to do with their guys (when the real problem was that the guys had never been taught about loving Jesus Christ).

And I have seen young people like you have described,too. But that doesn't excuse looking like the world. Kudos to them for being soft to the Holy Spirit...but the Bible says be separate - that means be separate. No, it will not only show in their actions. It will show in every aspect of their lives - including dress. Do I think the kids you describes aren't Christian? No - but I do think they need to grow.

It DOES show in their dress, in that they dress modestly. But there's a difference in dressing modestly and in dressing "church-ily". And you know what? People respond way better to modest dress as opposed to "church" dress. When you go up to someone dressed in church clothes, a lot of people will automatically shut off because they've had so much experience with judgmental church people who wouldn't accept them because they thought the fish should be clean before they even caught it. And I grew up around way too many kids that though they were automatically justified and automatically better than all the others because their parents taught them how to dress like church kids.

And that's why I grew up around kids who looked and dressed like church kids, but when they got away from church and got away from their parents, suddenly they were "looking right" but they were far from acting right or being right.

And this goes right back to the words of Jesus...

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrties! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleaness. Even so, ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." Matthew 23:27-28

Yes, those kids need to grow, just as we all do. But their growth in God is not going to make them dress more like religion wants them to. What it's going to do is separate them even further from the world, from religion, and from the ideas and traditions of men.

It is a shame that so many churches major on the external, and do not teach how to have an abundant life with Christ. But it is also a shame that a church will teach how to have an abundant life with Christ and leave its people with the idea that they can look like the world and it's okay 'cause God looks on the heart. Again, God knows that man looks on the external and that's one of the reasons we are to be separate. The world and Christianity cannot be mixed.

Right, it can't. That's why Christianity has got to learn that the world is focused on the material, but Christianity is about the spiritual, and the exterior is going to be a reflection of that--and again, no, that's not necessarily going to mean looking like church folks think we should look.

[Guest Guest]

Behold the Lamb,

What is the leaven of Herod in your opinion?

[Behold the Lamb]

Behold the Lamb,

What is the leaven of Herod in your opinion?

In modern application? Many of the modern-day rockstar televangelists, the misapplication, misuse of some CCM/CR music, the modern spiritual frenzies--Eckhart Tolle (which teaches a perverted Jesus), false modern revival that tickle the ears and cater to the flesh (like the one in Lakeland with Todd Bentley, for example), Christian compromise in the political realm according to human wisdom, churches that form unholy alliances with evil worldly governments, etc., and so on and so forth.

On the other hand, you have the leaven of the Pharisees, which has produced dead churches, religion-centered churches, lukewarm churches that have all the rules down but wouldn't know the Son of God if he walked right in front of them, churches whose man focus is on the traditions of God, churches who hate anything that's unfamiliar and out of the normal, etc.

Neither is good.

[Guest Guest]

In modern application? Many of the modern-day rockstar televangelists, the misapplication, misuse of some CCM/CR music, the modern spiritual frenzies--Eckhart Tolle (which teaches a perverted Jesus), false modern revival that tickle the ears and cater to the flesh (like the one in Lakeland with Todd Bentley, for example), Christian compromise in the political realm according to human wisdom, churches that form unholy alliances with evil worldly governments, etc., and so on and so forth.

I agree with all the examples you mentioned. But how do YOU know where to draw the line? For example, you said pants are "ok" but miniskirts are not because they tend to incite lust. However, I have met others who say short skirts and skimpy clothing are "ok", and are are "the culture" not sin... Just know every argument I have seen you attempt to use to justify what you think is "ok" is being used by someone else to justify the next step downward into greater impurity. I really think you are under the impression a little leaven isn't that bad and will not leaven the whole lump. Scripture says otherwise.

On the other hand, you have the leaven of the Pharisees, which has produced dead churches, religion-centered churches, lukewarm churches that have all the rules down but wouldn't know the Son of God if he walked right in front of them, churches whose man focus is on the traditions of God, churches who hate anything that's unfamiliar and out of the normal, etc.

That is true. However, you should notice in scripture not all the pharisees were bad, a number were Godly people who believed on Christ. Know that although as a group they certainly went far beyond scripture, In many ways the sect of the pharisees was right doctrinally, the problem was that to many of its members it was just a set of rules and a form of Godliness. That is why Jesus said they made the outside of the cup beautiful, they "looked" like a Godly believer should indeed have looked in that day, but many of their hearts were wicked and they were only making a show. It was not of faith to those, but with others it was and when Christ came they believed on him. On the other hand I am not aware of any individuals mentioned who were part of the sadducees or the Herodians believing on him. They were corrupt in heart and in doctrine. The the doctrine of the pharisees overall was far closer to the truth, but the hearts of many were evil, so in that respect they were no better in the sight of Christ.