Jump to content

Musician4God1611

Members
  • Posts

    310
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Musician4God1611

  1. 18 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

    I agree with you that Clinton and JFK were immoral, but they was small time folk compared to Trump.

    Trump has been married 3 times.

    There are a number of known adulterous affairs. No one know how many others there are.

    Nineteen women have accused Trump of sexual harrassment.

    It is well known that Trump had a close association with "Fat Tony" Salerno, the mobster who controlled the concrete industry in New York City. If Trump had not been compromised and cooperated with "Fat Tony" his NYC buildings were never have been built. No concrete, no building. Trump had a close association with the Philadelphia gangster, Philip Testa. Trump Plaza was specifically mentioned when Salerno was charged with rigging construction bids. Salerno had arranged things with Trump concerning concrete needed for the project.

    Over 10,000 lies were documented that he told while president.

    It is well know that Trump uses undocumented, illegal Polish workers in Florida. 

    The list of his immorality and criminal activity goes on and on. He should be named "Teflon" Don. 

    Immoral and unethical/criminal are not the same thing. With that in mind, the only thing that you have said about Trump that doesn't apply to the others is that he has had multiple marriages. JFK and Clinton both had known adulterous affairs, and no one knows how many others there are. You don't use your position as a means to gain sexual favors without being guilty of sexual harassment, ergo both JFK and Clinton are undoubtedly guilty of sexual harassment. It could be argued, however that whereas Trump is guilty of much immorality, JFK and Clinton both were guilty of it while in the White House. Look, I have no qualms with someone saying that Trump is a bad person, he is, just don't go and say he was "the MOST immoral person EVER" to be president.

     

    On a side note, it is a well known fact that every president for the past 50+ years have been a liar, and 10,000 lies in four years only comes out to about 7 lies a day. I know "Pastors" who lie more than that.

  2. 19 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

    The thread is about Trump, so you are guilty. Stay on the subject and you will look better. I expect you voted for Trump, the most immoral person to ever run for or be president. 

    "The most immoral person to EVER run for or be president." REALLY?!?!? There is no doubt that Trump is an immoral person (as most all lost people are), but to say that he is the most immoral is, at best, a guess based off of bias opinion. There have been numerous immoral presidents in the White House. Perhaps the two most notable were JFK and Clinton. I don't generally step into political discussions because for the most part they are a complete waste of time that borders on idolatry for many Christians, but this sets me off. Just because you think something is so, doesn't make it fact. 

  3. 15 hours ago, SureWord said:

    "The Church's One Foundation" by Samuel J. Stone 

    I've always found something sketchy about this hymn. Very papist sounding.

    1) "Her charter of salvation, One Lord, one faith, one birth".

    Paul said, "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" Eph. 4:5 

    This always made me think the verse was being tweaked to teach baptismal regeneration.

    2) "Partakes one holy food".

    Is this referring to the Eucharist?

    3) "And mystic sweet communion With those whose rest is won."

    Prayers to the Saints?

    Sure enough, Samuel J. Stone was a CoE priest and he based the hymn on The Apostles Creed. He wrote 12 hymns based on the 12 Articles of the Apostles Creed this one being based on the 9th Article:

    "The holy Catholic Church; the Communion of Saints".

    Now, the hymn can be viewed differently by the singer for example:

    "partake one holy food"

    could be thought of as "Jesus, the bread of heaven" but understand the author's original intent.

     

     

    Yes, this song has always bothered me. I haven't been in a lot of churches where they sing it, but when it is sung I always think, "Really? Are you guys paying attention to what you're singing."

  4. 13 hours ago, SureWord said:

    No, the "emptying" was that Jesus removed all his divinity but love. The word was altered to support the doctrine of kenosis to satisfy to liberal translators who rejected the deity of Christ. Even the term sounds ridiculous. What does it even mean? Sounds like some Hindu nonsense of obtaining nirvana. Christ humbled himself not emptied himself. We are to be like him in humility not "emptility".

    So, I'll stick with the KJV.

    Charles got this one wrong just like he got eternal security wrong. He's still one of the greatest hymn writers, though IMO, and I still love this hymn.

    The “doctrine” of kenosis was said to be first taught by Gottfried Thomasius, who was born in 1804. Charles Wesley died in 1788. I’m pretty sure that isn’t what he was perpetuating.

    Additionally, just because you think a term sounds ridiculous, doesn’t nullify it.

    On top of that, I repeat that it doesn’t merely say that Christ emptied himself, but rather that he emptied himself of all but love. If God is love, then he couldn’t possibly empty himself of his deity and retain pure love.

    This is not even mentioning the implication that those who disagree with you about this don’t stick with the KJV, which is an ungrounded basis.

     I believe at this point it would be safe to assume we won’t be reaching an agreement on this so we’d best just agree to disagree and go on.

  5. I still don't get where you are coming from. If the Bible says that God is love, then isn't emptying himself of all but love still remaining God since God is love. It is in essence saying emptied himself of all but God. You can't arbitrarily pronounce something to be a heresy without establishing the premises whereby you came to such a conclusion. I can promise you that Charles Wesley did not negate the deity of Christ.

  6. 15 hours ago, SureWord said:

    1) It mentions God's kingdom being brought to Earth through our deeds of love and mercy.

    2) It's talking about the Lord's coming to trample out Southerners via Yankee troops and dying to make men free nonsense. Not a very spiritual hymn but political propaganda.

    3) It says Christ "emptied" himself which is heretical. 

    4) It speaks of the Church as Mount Zion which smacks of Replacement Theology.

    5) Some Christmas hymns contain a Amillennial (not Post as I said before) slant as if the Lord has already returned and he's reigning over the world through his Church, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church of course. A hymn like "Joy to the World" really isn't fulfilled until the Second Coming. Heaven and Nature doesn't presently sing they groan.

    "I Love thy Kingdom, O Lord" is another one that confuses the kingdom with the church and can lead to further heretical beliefs and practices. The church is not the kingdom nor the kingdom the church. When you go down that road you always end up with a church/state situation. 

    I'm a bit confused about number 3. Why do you say Christ emptying himself is heretical? Doesn't Philippians say that he humbled himself and became obedient? Isn't that, in essence, emptying himself? Also, the song doesn't say that he merely emptied himself, but rather that he emptied himself of all but love. Now I know some people say that this isn't true, but you have to consider this from a poetical standpoint. Obviously it isn't saying that there was no other attribute but love left, but rather that he removed from him any potential for an attribute that is opposing of love. Some would argue that because he is God that he didn't have to empty himself of anything, because it wasn't already there, but if that logic were to stand then we would have to also say that he couldn't humble himself because he was already meek. When the author says emptied himself of all but love, he isn't saying that he had unloving things deep within that he had to remove, but rather that he humbled himself as the Bible says.

  7. 9 hours ago, SureWord said:

    Some that come right to mind:

    1) Lead on King Eternal 

    2) Battle Hymn of the Republic 

    3) And Can it Be?

    4) Glorious Things of Thee Are Spoken 

    5) Many of the Christmas hymns seem to be teaching Postmillennialism.

    I still like these hymns I just ignore the stanzas that contain bad theology. Also, my three favorite hymn writers are Charles Wesley, Isaac Watts and John Newton. While their hymns contain some of the deepest theology they at times contain the worse. I guess when a writer wads out into deeper theology they also will make some more noticeable mistakes.

     

     

     

    Can you substantiate your claims? It isn't going to be much of a discussion if everybody gives a list a songs and says they contain bad theology. It would be like saying, "These are bad. Why? Because I said so." Why do you say they contain bad theology?

  8. 50 minutes ago, PastorMatt said:

    I'm necessarily disagreeing with with bad theology in some hymns, but I do think we sometimes take liberty in assuming what the author of the Hymn was thinking. I only got to the first song so far and he/she mentions this for the song He Lives...

    Yes, I know the Bible tells me He lives, and the Bible also says He dwells within me.

    Eph 3:17 "17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,"

    I've always took that as the author of that song was using Scripture to say that He dwells in our hearts. 

    I wouldn't say it's theologically wrong as Scripture will back up what the song is saying, but I do think more can be added to the song.  Of course this not Scripture so it pretty much is opinion based.

    Shallow yes, bad theology...I'm not so sure

    I agree, PastorMatt. I had read this post in the past and my thoughts were, well I do know that he lives in my heart. I don't even think it's that shallow. I think a lot of Christians discredit this side of the Christian life because it makes them uncomfortable to feel like they are approaching anywhere near to what the Charismatics believe. The things of God are not perceived by logic, therefore it's not really enough to say, "it's this way because I read it". It's all well and good to say, "I know he lives because the Bible tells me so" but that will get you nowhere with someone who doesn't believe the Bible. Do I know he lives because the Bible says so? Yes. Do I know that he lives because he's in my heart and I talked with him this morning? Yes. His Spirit bears witness with our Spirit that we are the son's of God.

     

    I had hoped that Bouncing Bill would repost the songs he had listed before with a reason for why he feels they contain bad theology. Bouncing Bill, would you do that?

  9. 1 hour ago, Bouncing Bill said:

    Sensual is not restricted to flesh. To me some sacred music is very sensual, uplifting my spirit toward God. I consider that very sensual and it is sensual in a good, positive way.

    Actually, sensual is restricted to the flesh. The definition of sensual is, "pertaining to the senses, as distinct from the mind or soul" (Webster's 1828). If it is distinct from the mind or soul, it's of the flesh. I would identify that your trouble in perceiving this subject is summed up in the phrase you keep repeating, "to me". When it comes to truth, opinions do not matter. "To me" doesn't come into play.

  10. Well, let's start with what I would surely hope would be the most obvious: The Battle Hymn of the Republic.

    This song really has nothing to do with Christianity at all, and if you try to make it fit, it puts us in the  battle of Armageddon, sort of, I think. It's very unclear. Verse 3 says this:

    I have read a fiery gospel writ in burnish'd rows of steel
    As ye deal with my condemners so with you my grace shall deal
    Let the hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel
    His truth is marching on

    Basically if you want the grace of God, kill the condemners.

  11. 4 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

    Do you sing hymns that contain bad theology? Hymns such as:

    1. I'll Fly Away
    2. Bring Them In
    3.  He Lives
    4. Softly and Tenderly Jesus is Calling
    5. Away in the Manager

    All these hymn I've listed I have loved. But I have grown and realize there is one or more theological problems with each hymn.

    The one hymn I really do not like is: 

    There is a Fountain

    Years ago I had a friend who almost did not continue to attend church and become a Christian because of this hymn. The opening line, "There is a fountain filled with blood" almost made her throw up and there is no theological truth in that line. Indeed, it is an untrue statement. 

    I do not sing hymns that contain bad theology. That being said, many people disagree about what theology is and isn't sound. I look forward to seeing a separate thread about this, because I'm curious to know what about some of these you say is bad theology. It's really baffling. 

  12. Ok, where to begin....

     

    This absolutely nothing like meat offered to idols. Music is one of the most important things in the Christian life. Consider Ephesians 5:18-21 where he says, "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God." When we look at it without the verse separations we see that this is all one sentence, and as such it is one thought. From this we can learn that being filled with the Spirit is directly linked with things like submission, thankfulness, and Godly music. It is an undeniable truth that music is an integral part of the Spirit-filled life, and the last time I checked, the things of God are not dependent on our opinion about them. When it comes to music, our opinion about it does not matter.

    When we talk about the structure of music, it is an undeniable fact that the way music is structured as an effect on our body and our mind. Anyone who has spent any amount of time honestly looking at it will know that the mind effects the body and spirit, the spirit effects the body and mind, and the body effects the spirit and mind. If you are physically sick, you are at a higher risk of depression, and the depressed person will nearly always be unsuccessful in walking with God. That is just one example of how the three are intertwined. When we look at music, the first effect we see is the beat. That's because it's the most obvious. This effects are body. Even lost, secular, rock 'n roll artist knew (and know) the the beat drives the body. What most Christians teaching about music don't tell you, is that the beat is also the easiest part of the music to correct. This is why you have so many churches taking CCM music and "fixing" it. If the only issue with CCM was the beat, I would agree with them. The more subtle structure of music is the melody. CCM tends you use a repetitive, almost monotonous form of melody. What we see from this (there was an excellent study on this done called "Music and the mind" but I don't remember the man's name) is that it will do one of two things depending on the person. For some people it will irritate them and make them want to shut it up. For other's, it will set them in a semi hypnotic state. This is how CCM, and other forms of music, introduce false doctrine into their songs without people rejecting it. There can also be harmonies which are wrong. This is a working premise of blues, jazz, rag, and such like that has worked itself into "Gospel" music. There are two forms of harmony, consonance and dissonance. Consonance resolves itself and is "pleasant", dissonance does not resolve itself and is "unpleasant" on it's own. There is a lot of music the works off of unresolved dissonance, or dissonance that "resolves" into something that doesn't really resolve it. This adversely effects the emotions. And lastly there is lyrics. If any song is unscriptural, it should not be sung. I don't care if it's a "precious old hymn" or a brand new single.

    Do many young people think that we are being Pharisees with our music? Probably, but that's because many Christians, and a lot of preachers do. One of the most prevalent responses I get when talking to preachers about music is "I don't really know anything about music". Well, if you don't know anything about music, learn. We wouldn't take that attitude with submission, we would learn about submission. We wouldn't take that attitude about thankfulness, we would learn about thankfulness. We shouldn't take that attitude about music, it's necessary in living a Spirit-filled life.

    In reference to Country and Rock music...

    I love apples, but I'm not digging through the dump to find one.

  13. On 6/17/2021 at 10:14 AM, BrotherTony said:

    When you preach (Pastors and laymen, please answer if you can), what is your style of presentation?

    Are you monotone? 

    Are you loud in emphasizing your points? 

    Do you preach from notes, or off the top of your head "as the spirit leads" you? 

    How long is your typical sermon? 

    These are just questions I throw out there every now and then to try and gauge what preachers/laymen are doing. I'd appreciate your input. Please, let's try to stay on subject in this thread.

    MODERATORS: If this is in the wrong section, would you please feel free to move it to the correct section. Thanks.

    BT

    When you preach what is your style of presentation? I almost always preach expository, or textual (mostly expository). When I teach, it is more topical. I never do narrative sermons, it's just not me.

    Are you monotone? I'm not monotone by any means. I'm a very expressive person, and my preaching follows. I talk with my hands and emphasize a lot.

    Are you loud in emphasizing your points? Occasionally. I don't ever intend on being loud. I try to always pray beforehand that the Lord will help me deliver the message exactly the way I need to deliver it. I pray if I need to be loud, that it will be portrayed as passion, and not contention. I pray if I need to be quite, that it will be meditative, and not boring.

    Do you preach from notes, or off the top of your head "as the spirit leads" you? I almost always use notes, though I can preach without them. My notes, however, are just the basic points, subpoints, and Scriptures.

    How long is your typical sermon? I generally preach until I'm done. But now, starting a new church (we had our first service a month ago), I have been making it a point of only preaching 30 to 35 minutes. My longest message that I'm aware of was 1 hour and 58 minutes. So basically I'm all over the place on time.

  14. Never said the person was right, I just said they can still go to heaven. Baptists will not be the only ones in heaven. And contrary to what some may believe, All the Christians in the world that have the right doctrine are not necessarily Baptist. Look, I'm an Independent Baptist. I know why I'm an Independent Baptist, and I will most likely be an Independent Baptist until the day I die. But I'm Baptist Because I'm a Bible believer, I'm not a Bible Believer because I'm a Baptist. 

    Anyway, I digress. I wouldn't have pursued this dialog except for the fact that is the personification of exactly what I said. Independent Baptist seem to think they'll be the only ones in Heaven.

  15. The meek man cares not at all who is greater than he, for he has long ago decided that the esteem of the world is not worth the effort. He develops toward himself a kindly sense of humor and learns to say, ’Oh, so you have been overlooked? They have placed someone else before you? They have whispered that you are pretty small stuff after all? And now you feel hurt because the world is saying about you the very things you have been saying about yourself? Only yesterday you were telling God that you were nothing, a mere worm of the dust. Where is your consistency? Come on, humble yourself, and cease to care what men think.’

    A.W. Tozer - The Pursuit of God

  • Member Statistics

    6,088
    Total Members
    2,124
    Most Online
    shlomo
    Newest Member
    shlomo
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...