Posted on 06/11/2012 6:32:24 AM PDT by marshmallow
Good post. I don’t disagree with you except that I feel that it’s not an entertainment issue. It’s a leadership issue. You can have both Christ centered entertainment with people using their talents AND have Christ centered sermons. One without the other is when problems arise.
A good way to see what the church’s focus is is to imagine it without a building (whether it be a fire, flood, etc). Would it survive? The church building, instruments, drums, organ don’t make up the church. The people do. If you ask the members what would happen if everything was wiped out and they panic and say IDK, then you have an immature church. If the church doesn’t miss a beat and continues meeting (when feasibly possible of course) then you have a mature church. I hope I’m making sense here.
All I’m trying to say is that having entertainment is not the issue that makes a church fail or not be mature.
justice14 wrote:
“All I’m trying to say is that having entertainment is not the issue that makes a church fail or not be mature.”
St. Paul, in accord with Moses, disagrees with you:
“And do not become idolators as were some of them. As it is written, ‘The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.’”(1 Corinthians 10:7, quoting Exodus 32:6)
Sorry. I meant Godly entertainment. And last I checked, electric guitar and light bulbs were not anti-God, so I think we are alright. Now if, by entertainment, you think I meant strippers, and boos, then yes. You are correct.
I think you need to look a little more deeply into what Paul (and Moses before him) was actually saying instead of simply taking as true what someone says the verses are saying. The problem with most generic non-denominational churches today is that their theology is very superficial, and their worship heavy on emotion and psychological stimulus, and the practical result of their Bible interpretation is to read into the text what they feel it is saying to them rather than take it at face value in its historical context as speaking eternal, unchanging truth to fickle, prideful, self-absorbed, self-deluded sinners ... as it has been doing these many, many, many centuries as trends and fashions shifted and changed and whole nations and peoples rose and flourished and then foundered and disappeared.
Of course, light bulbs and guitars are not anti-God, neither are candles and organs. “Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.” (James 1:16-17) Nothing God gives - and remember He is the Creator and Provider of all things - is anything less than good. It is man, in his sin and pride, who is able to turn any and every good gift of His to vain or even evil purpose.
My point is simply this: Where and when is entertainment ever appropriate in the presence of God? Show me any place in Scripture where this is either recommended or done with God’s approval. I look forward to your answer.
You just proved my point. “their theology is superficial”. That is the exact requirement I mentioned that would cause a church to be immature.
14 Wearing a linen ephod, David was dancing before the Lord with all his might. 2 Sam 6.
What it comes down to is YOUR opinion of entertainment. Some people view the piano as entertainment. Some view the organ as entertainment. Some view lights as entertainment. Some view guitars as entertainment.
justice14 wrote:
“14 Wearing a linen ephod, David was dancing before the Lord with all his might. 2 Sam 6.”
That is the verse I expected you to cite. It is also the only one you cite, which I also assumed would be the case. Where does it indicate in the text of 2 Samuel 6 that David was doing this in order to entertain an audience? You see, you are making an assumption in regard to dancing and its function in our contemporary society and then reading that assumption back into the 11th century B.C. text of 2 Samuel. In this you illustrate my point rather nicely.
When it comes to entertainment, the argument is not about either your or my view of what constitutes entertainment, as you tried to make the argument in your final paragraph. The argument is about entertainment itself. You know what the definition and purpose of entertainment is as well as I do. And even if you didn’t a quick perusal of any worthwhile dictionary will settle the question quickly. No, I asked you when and where in the Bible entertainment was ever recommended or practiced with approval in the presence of God, i.e., in worship. You did not supply any clear text or example. And, of course, that was also my point. You will search long and hard for such ... and you will not find it. Why?
Ok. I’m sorry. I used the wrong word. Not entertainment. Loud music, guitars, drums, lights does not = a bad church. Yes, if they are doing it for ‘entertainment’ purposes alone, then that is not good and shallow. But if they are not, then God will use them to facilitate his message through their instruments, attitudes, focus, etc.
God should be glorified in a church’s service regardless of decibel level or instruments used. As long as the church focuses on sound theology and correctly discipling it’s members, how they choose to worship will follow in that. If they truly come to worship (musicians, singers, lights) with an attitude of allowing God to use their beautiful talents, then God will glorify that.
Just the same as an organist playing her heart out for the Lord. Or a pianist. Or whatever.
And it is about what YOU view as entertainment. B/c that is where you are drawing the line. Is it worship? Or entertainment? I was wrong in using the word entertainment and I apologize. But It was a misuse of the word, not the intent of what I meant.
justice14 wrote:
“God should be glorified in a church’s service regardless of ... instruments used.”
I can go with you that far.
justice14 also wrote:
“As long as the church focuses on sound theology and correctly discipling it’s members, how they choose to worship will follow in that.”
I can agree with that also.
Which brings me to something that very much troubles me about most of what I call generic non-denominational churches. I don’t find much, if any - if any! - sound, solid, theologically serious, filled-with-the-unconditioned-gospel-of-Jesus-Christ hymnody (the old way of speaking of what the congregation and/or choir/chorus sings). My question would be: Why do so many of the high decibel level, special lighting churches have such vacuous hymnody, i.e., songs?
And if you disagree, give me five or ten examples of the ones you most like or appreciate, the ones that are most sung at your church, and I will look at their content and react.
I would agree that the mega non denominational churches tend to be non traditional and less theological. They seem to be more loose on what they push as sound doctorine and more open to “new age” stuff where everything is ok (this is not the church I am talking about) And that is wrong.
I disagree that most non traditional worship churches are not theological though (when it’s not really a huge church and I do believe that there are some big churches that do it right as well. It’s just harder to find them).
Psalms 150; Praise the LORD! Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens! Praise him for his mighty deeds; praise him according to his excellent greatness! Praise him with trumpet sound; praise him with lute and harp! Praise him with tambourine and dance; praise him with strings and pipe! Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals! Let everything that has breath praise the LORD! Praise the LORD!
Again. Loud music =/= unsound Theology. How many “loud” churches have you been to? I don’t get the song comments. If the song is true. IE Jesus loves you, He died for our sin, He’s coming back, etc, it doesn’t have to be “deep”. Now if the songs have stuff like Jesus approves of your homosexuality, then yes. That is a problem. Where in the Bible does it say about being “deep” when you praise God? It says a lot about giving a joyful noise and praising him, but nothing about using deep theological songs to sing. Again, as long as the songs speak truth and not lies, God woill rejoice with us.
Also, like I said, If the leadership in the church is following a Christ filled theology, their worship leaders will go down the same path. If they don’t, a Christ like leader will correct.
Most of my church (1 guitar, 1 bass, 2 pianos, 1 Drum) does hymns (using those instruments). We also sing contemporary songs about God’s love, God’s sacrifice, God’s peace, God’s presence. And this is the norm for a multitude of non traditional churches. They are fine.
Methinks what the writer is describing is romanticism versus classicism in Christianity.
Catholicism has long had strains of it, though the official church doctrine is probably rooted in classicism. America has always had romanticist leanings, including its waves of Christian revivalism.
I suspect with the ascendance of science and technology, a romantic rather than classic pitch will continue to do better for drawing in congregants. The Christian heart is likely to be less skeptical than the Christian head.
But there always has and likely always will be tensions between the two.
My dear justice14, I am not arguing for or against “decibel level” (per your earlier post). Decibel level is not a matter of theology, but of propriety and common sense. Regarding hymns or spiritual songs, there is no way to evaluate them without knowing what they are and what they say.
If I point out to you the general theological weakness of most generic non-denominational churches - whether large or small! - I do so based on my own firsthand experience and conversations with those who attend them regularly. On that basis I perceive a general weakness ... unless those type churches in my region are markedly exceptional from those of the rest of the nation (which I doubt). What you do at yours you need not defend in the face of my non-attack on yours. I don’t know what you do, and therefore have offered you no opinion on yours. Yours may be the exception to what I have observed.
The salient point the article makes, that so much of what is called Christianity in America today is nothing more than “moralistic therapeutic deism,” is dead on right. It is not Christianity. It is the very same lukewarm, one-size-fits-all, post-Christian, palatable-to-all-more-or-less-decent-people “religion” that is condemned in the book of Revelation by One no less than the Christ Himself.
Part of the trouble here is that so many denominational churches, mainline if you will, have been peddling drivel and nonsense for so long that most in them don’t even know what they were founded upon and what they ought to be preaching and teaching so as to honestly represent the name they bear. Many have fled such churches only to embrace something more outwardly acceptable but far weaker and confused in their understanding than was the theology coming out of the Reformation.
I think I see what you are saying. I apologize if I took it the wrong way. I do agree that churches have been severely watered down and I would kind of agree that it is mostly non denominational churches.
My only point was that modern music and presentation does not always equal watered down theology. It can. I don’t deny that. But it doesn’t always equal it. That was my only point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.