Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 9th, 2007, 4:55 am #31

I know, I just had to open my big mouth (metaphorical) and say something else. Why is this even a debate? The people here at www.ihatemychurch.com (alternate spelling of www.concernedmembers.com) obviously don't base their beliefs in scripture. If they did they would be able to see that what they see as "God's Will" is really their own personal opinion. That should be obvious by reading 2 Tim 3:17. You know, that thing about all Scripture being God-breathed? Read that and then you can't ignore Pslam 150, no matter how hard you try, no matter what you come up with, no matter what you say or scheme, if you try to write these off then you are calling Paul a liar when he wrote to Timothy or you are saying the OT doesn't matter at all...which would again be calling Paul a liar. Take your pick of which way you want to completely deface the New Testament while keeping ahold of your personal opinions, because they're obviously more important than the truth.
Returner, I sense that you've got a lot on your heart. You've got a lot of pent-up emotions and anger that needs to be let out. You've started by calling me a "hypocrite," so why stop there? Surely you can do much better than that, can't you? Don't you have some really rip-snortin' "classy" epithets that are just boilin' down there in your heart of hearts that need ventin'? So tell me, Returner, wouldn't you agree that callin' me some rippin' names like "knuckle dragger" (insinuating that I'm an ape) or "Neanderthal" (insinuating that I'm a primitive cave man) or just a plain ole straightforward name like "radical religious idiot" would really make you feel better and just completely make your day?

Now be honest, or you'll brand yourself just as much or worse the "hypocrite" that you accuse me of being.
Quote
Share

anonymous too
anonymous too

May 9th, 2007, 4:45 pm #32

Please re-read 1st Corinthians 13. These posts definitely do not reflect the love that is referred to in the passage.

In Christ
Quote
Share

The Returner
The Returner

May 9th, 2007, 6:33 pm #33

And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the idol,
and rejoiced in the works of their own hands. Acts 7:41
  • <font color=blue>Rising up to PLAY meant singing, dancing and sexual and homosexual PLAY: "The Apis cult dances of Egypt had their equivalent in the Cretan bull dance of about 1400 BC.

    Other choral dances that came to Athens from Crete include two dedicated to Apollo [Apollyon]and one in which naked boys simulated wrestling matchesFemale characteristics were stressed in a stately and devout round dance in honour of the gods, performed by choruses of virgins.</font>
This is defined by WORD MEANINGS to be musical idolatry of Apis the golden calf representing the Egyptian trinity. That is what David did when he PLAYED with the camp following girls and MADE HIMSELF VILE.

Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven;
  • as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel,
    have ye offered to me slain beasts and
    sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness? Acts 7:42
Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the STAR of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.

Acts 7:43Our fathers had the tabernacle of WITNESS in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses,
  • that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen. Acts 7:44
Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus [Joshua] into the possession of the Gentiles,
  • unto the days of David; Acts 7:45
WHO found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle [witness] for the Godof Jacob. Acts 7:46
BUT Solomon built him an house Acts 7:47

HOWBEIT the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet. Acts 7:48

what house will ye build me? saith the Lord:
or what is the place of my rest? Acts 7:49

Hath not my hand made all these things? Acts 7:50
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears,
ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.Acts 7:51

<font color=blue>Now, you will understand that when the loud NOISE--never called Music--sounded when the Ark of the Covenant was taken into the Most Holy place,God SHUT DOWN THE TEMPLE so that the priests COULD NOT SERVE. This REMOVED ready access to the symbol of God's PRESENCE and access to the WORD once under the Mercy Seat.</font>
  • Not to worry: the people CAST OUT of the gates during this EXORCISM prayed directly to GOD and GOD answered from HEAVEN. So, I GUESS that David didn't have God trapped in the Ark of the covenant and God never LIVED in a house built by human hands.
<font color=purple>Now, you will remember that TEMPORARILY God abandoned them to WORSHIP THE STARRY HOST but this was ON THE WAY to Captivity and Death in Assyria and Babylon for the TRANSGRESSION of MUSICAL IDOLATRY of the pagan trinity.

Now because the Levitical Warrior Musicians served (hard bondage) the KING and the COMMANDERS OF THE ARMY who served under the STAR OF DAVID, it should NOT be surprised that a Star Worshipper would want to worship in the FIRMAMENT.

So? You REALLY want to return to Canaanite Baalism? Do you REALLY want to be INTIMIDATED by the Warrior "kings" and their new Levitical Warrior Musicians so that they can LIE about every Biblical passage about music and all other known evidence and PICK YOUR POCKETS like "ole bloody hands, David?"

Besides, ALL of the instruments in Psalm 150 except the SHOFAR--because it was NOT a musical instrument--were abandoned when the temple was destroyed. ALL of them have roots in Satan, prostitutes or Warriors and David WAS the warrior king with whom the elders REPLACED God. </font>

I am quite certain that the INTENTIONAL SOWERS OF DISCORD intending to lie TO God and ABOUT God gather specificially to LAUGHT at the silly lambs they have fleeced. I can assure you that NOT a one of them will GIVE AN ANSWER as long as they have dupes.
First of all, you never acknowledged the fact that I destroyed every aspect of your arguement against playing music for worship purposes being unbiblical. Second of all, I've really got nothing against you other than the fact that you are hypocritical in your arguments, you know using your crazy double standards the way you like to do. But other than that I've got nothing against you. And Kenny...what?
Quote
Share

CCRM-Concerned
CCRM-Concerned

May 10th, 2007, 8:24 pm #34

<font face=arial>While Christian Rock Music has become one of the major enticements promoted by the Charismatic and Community Church Movements in their church and TV-programmed gatherings—and which undoubtedly has infected not only certain mega churches of Christ but also a number of fundamentalist and conservative church groups—there has also surfaced concerns that if this trend continues, the next and future generations will face a seemingly insurmountable task of determining what is reverential in God’s sight and what the pure gospel message is supposed to convey.

Are we in that group that should be concerned about whereto the Christian “Rock” Music is leading the “Christian” youth of this postmodern era, even certain adult “Christians” with similar tendencies or appellations as do the young Christians?

As the passages in Eph. 5:18,19 and Col. 3:16 clearly emphasize the truth that we “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly” and that we “teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,” do we take such truth to heart or do we let the “rock” music overshadow the truth?

Shouldn’t there be biblical screens that any Christian “rock” music must pass before it can be labeled as “Christian”? Perhaps, the “lyrics” screen would be the easiest form of examination upon which the Christian “rock” music is determined as a failure. What about the “character” screen—in this case, the “attitudes” depicted in the “rock” music and as portrayed by the “performers”? Is it reverential or worshipful; is there any expression of real AWE [not to be confused with the modern definition of the word “awesome”]?

Then, not the least of all and the often ignored “score” screen. Uh-huh! Many will argue that “the arrangement of the musical notes” has nothing to do with passing or failing the “score” screen. Are we prepared to rebut such a notion by stating that while the notes should compliment the words, in no way should the arrangement overshadow the message being conveyed? Otherwise, the “ROCK” music is no longer “Christian”?

Therefore, when the “Contemporary Christian ‘Rock’ Music” fails ANY ONE of the biblical screens, it is or it has become only “Rock” music and Satanic.</font>
<font face=arial>It’s not about just any of the contemporary Christian songs—some of which may PASS the biblical screens mentioned in the original post. It’s not about all the hymns in the hymnbooks, either—for some of the “hymns” would FAIL the biblical screens. The one who leads or starts singing should be careful in selecting hymns that meet the scriptural criteria that encourage “letting the word of Christ DWELL IN us richly” and that “teach and admonish one another IN….” Generally speaking, publishers and editors and compilers in the brotherhood have done a fine job of including hymns that are doctrinally sound—especially in past generations, i.e., prior to the postmodern era when the church is being constantly bombarded with culture-driven influences and spiritual-emotional eroticism and entertainment.

The “praise” song’s words and expressions may be doctrinally sound [not to mention the self-centeredness and egotistical elements in them], but when unintelligible o-o-o-o-o or humming is substituted for these words, the performance effect resembles that of the inanimate and lifeless musical instrumentation—all of these elements DO NOT teach and admonish, and the word of Christ dwells in poorly.

It’s about the “ROCK” factor with all else that it encompasses that negates the worshipful attitude that a Christian should have in the assembly. It’s not about what tickles the nerve endings. It’s not about how excellently a SOLOIST or an elite Praise Team performs. Praising can be verbalized or vocalized or be in prayerful delivery when the Christian is all alone. Praising does not even have to be done through singing. [Do you see what Ken Sublett has been constantly reminding us about?] Somehow, professed Christians have gotten the impression that they can’t seem to do any “praising” on their own and by themselves but have to eagerly wait until Sunday to get “motivated” to “praise.”

It is sad to see it happening before our eyes—when the “praise service” in TV-programming format becomes the focus and reason to assembly. Is this the “emotional high” that we hear about these days?</font>
Quote
Share

The Returner
The Returner

May 10th, 2007, 8:34 pm #35

Inanimate objects can't be used to priase God? What about (and i know you non-instrumentalists think it's a dead horse, but that's just because it's the only way you can try to get out of the argument) Ps. 150? That aside, I think Jesus told someone once that if the people (on Palm Sunday) didn't praise him that the rocks would cry out. That's just what I remember at the moment. And you're still changing the subject. I was talking about how Billy was a hypocrite using double standards and couldn't really defend himself as the two posts that are needed to show that are on this forum.
Quote
Share

The Returner
The Returner

May 10th, 2007, 8:43 pm #36

Is there some reason why "Anon" and "Returner" support modern praise songs that barely mention (or don't mention) God at all? At least, they get so furiously bent out of shape when their pet praise songs get criticized for being so abominably self-centered and so disrespectful of God by not mentioning His name or definitively referring to Him.

Hey, if you're more into the "Me Me Me," that's up to you, and if you're ashamed to sing and listen to songs that boldly exalt the name of God, because your friends might think you're weird and laugh at you, that's also up to you. But if you wanna do the right thing, you and all the other folks who are into praise music can send a message to the writers of the self-centered "hits": boycott their compositions, don't purchase them, and don't support the "Christian" artists who record them until they write and record songs that REALLY give praise to Almighty God, not to some vague phantom.

So what are you really into: Anything remotely "Christian" just as long as it has a good beat and rhythm, or something strongly Christian that's not afraid to proclaim the name of God and the message of salvation through faith and obedience to all that He has commanded us (Matt. 28:20)?
You apparently haven't read through the Pslams, Bill, or you might have noticed that some of them have more "I", "me", and "my" parts to them then some of the contemporary songs do.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 11th, 2007, 2:30 am #37

<font face=arial>While Christian Rock Music has become one of the major enticements promoted by the Charismatic and Community Church Movements in their church and TV-programmed gatherings—and which undoubtedly has infected not only certain mega churches of Christ but also a number of fundamentalist and conservative church groups—there has also surfaced concerns that if this trend continues, the next and future generations will face a seemingly insurmountable task of determining what is reverential in God’s sight and what the pure gospel message is supposed to convey.

Are we in that group that should be concerned about whereto the Christian “Rock” Music is leading the “Christian” youth of this postmodern era, even certain adult “Christians” with similar tendencies or appellations as do the young Christians?

As the passages in Eph. 5:18,19 and Col. 3:16 clearly emphasize the truth that we “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly” and that we “teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,” do we take such truth to heart or do we let the “rock” music overshadow the truth?

Shouldn’t there be biblical screens that any Christian “rock” music must pass before it can be labeled as “Christian”? Perhaps, the “lyrics” screen would be the easiest form of examination upon which the Christian “rock” music is determined as a failure. What about the “character” screen—in this case, the “attitudes” depicted in the “rock” music and as portrayed by the “performers”? Is it reverential or worshipful; is there any expression of real AWE [not to be confused with the modern definition of the word “awesome”]?

Then, not the least of all and the often ignored “score” screen. Uh-huh! Many will argue that “the arrangement of the musical notes” has nothing to do with passing or failing the “score” screen. Are we prepared to rebut such a notion by stating that while the notes should compliment the words, in no way should the arrangement overshadow the message being conveyed? Otherwise, the “ROCK” music is no longer “Christian”?

Therefore, when the “Contemporary Christian ‘Rock’ Music” fails ANY ONE of the biblical screens, it is or it has become only “Rock” music and Satanic.</font>
Several messages back, in retaliation to my harsh criticism of theologically weak "praise songs" like "Strong Tower," one of the anonymous detractors erroneously claimed that I had no Christian hymn or song that I found as "acceptable." Of course, such a statement was pure fantasy and hyperbole.

There is a hymn that truly exhalts Christ with very minimal references to self. Perhaps modern Christian writers can take some lessons from the lyrics to "Fairest Lord Jesus":

Fairest Lord Jesus, ruler of all nature,
O thou of God and man the Son,
Thee will I cherish, Thee will I honor,
Thou, my soul's glory, joy, and crown.

Fair are the meadows, fairer still the woodlands,
Robed in the blooming garb of spring:
Jesus is fairer, Jesus is purer
Who makes the woeful heart to sing.

Fair is the sunshine, fairer still the moonlight,
And all the twinkling starry host:
Jesus shines brighter, Jesus shines purer
Than all the angels heaven can boast.

Beautiful Savior! Lord of all the nations!
Son of God and Son of Man!
Glory and honor, praise, adoration,
Now and forevermore be thine.

Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

May 11th, 2007, 2:44 am #38

Inanimate objects can't be used to priase God? What about (and i know you non-instrumentalists think it's a dead horse, but that's just because it's the only way you can try to get out of the argument) Ps. 150? That aside, I think Jesus told someone once that if the people (on Palm Sunday) didn't praise him that the rocks would cry out. That's just what I remember at the moment. And you're still changing the subject. I was talking about how Billy was a hypocrite using double standards and couldn't really defend himself as the two posts that are needed to show that are on this forum.
Are you really gonna try to justify instrumental music with Psalm 150 again and again and again? It's an overworked topic, but for your benefit, we will elucidate:

As we cannot serve two masters, God and mammon, we likewise cannot follow two covenants, the Covenant of Moses and the Covenant of Christ; the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Any references to using musical instruments in worship in the Old Testament cannot be carried over and applied to the New Testament, because Christ nailed the Law of Moses to the cross (Col. 2:14). The New Covenant superceded the Old Covenant. The term "Law" has been used to refer to all the books of the Old Testament, not just the Pentateuch or the first five books of Moses. The ancient Jews referred to passages in Ezekiel, Isaiah, Psalms, and Daniel, for example, yet they said, "We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever..." (John 12:34). Paul did the same in Rom. 3:10-19. He cites the "Law" but quotes from Psalms and Isaiah. It is true that on the surface, the Torah or the "Law" refers to the five books of Moses, but in more common usage as seen in the New Testament, the word "Law," by metonymy, includes ALL the books of the Old Testament.

Thus Christians must justify their music in worship based on what is written in the New Testament, not in the Old Testament. The NT authorizes only vocal music (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), not instrumental. Don't dance around with statements like, "If God didn't want us to use instruments in Christian worship, He would have said so." He HAS told us the kind of music to use, and that is vocal music. We cannot supplement or supercede God's commands with our own preferences, for the New Testament commands us not to go above or beyond what is written in Scripture, and that would especially apply to God's commands (1 Cor. 4:6; Rev. 22:18-19). And also don't dance around with, "Rev. 22:18-19 applies only to the Book of Revelation." If we are commanded not to tamper with Revelation, the same principle applies to ALL books of the Bible. Even the OT had a command not to tamper with God's Word there (Deut. 4:2). God's Word must not be altered or twisted to suit our preferences. Since Christians follow the NT, we must not add instruments to worship, because instruments are not authorized in Christian worship.


Quote
Share

Joined: January 5th, 2007, 3:53 am

May 12th, 2007, 2:50 am #39

Dr. Bill wrote:

The NT authorizes only vocal music (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), not instrumental. Don't dance around with statements like, "If God didn't want us to use instruments in Christian worship, He would have said so." He HAS told us the kind of music to use, and that is vocal music.


Dr. Bill...are you speaking of our "worship" time (Sunday am, pm, and Wednesday pm) only? Or our lives 24/7?

RB
Quote
Like
Share

Donnie Cruz
Donnie Cruz

May 13th, 2007, 3:33 am #40

<font color=indigo size=3 face=times new roman>RB,

The New Testament has not specified “corporate” worship … as it is referred to in the religious world today. I don’t agree with that type of reference especially when this type of gathering resembles that which is made-for-TV programming. Now, in John 4, Jesus said that we are to worship the Father in spirit and in truth—and “worship” is the word mentioned in the passage—not “corporate” worship. In fact, it is painful to think that we would liken the gathering of Christians to that in a business or an entertainment setting.

Having said that, compare that [very much ritualistic] environment to the assembly of the saints in the early New Testament period.

Please note Acts 20:6-7—“And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.”

The two key elements that I observe in the above passage are: (a) the breaking of the bread and (b) the study of God’s Word.

I envision the gathering of the saints simply in those terms. The assembly is mentioned in a number of NT passages (James 2:2; Heb. 12:23; etc.). Heb. 10:25—“Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.”

In answer to your question, I would associate the expression “exhorting one another” with what is expressed in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16. The key points in these verses are to “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly” and “teaching and admonishing one another IN psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.” “One another” implies a gathering unless the only individual present in the assembly is schizophrenic. After all, the assembly, in synagogue pattern, is about a school of the Bible. It is exactly what the doctor ordered—let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another.

In essence, I personally would rather spend time praising our Lord alone. I shouldn’t have to wait until it is “praise service” time [what a misnomer] to get my “nerve endings” tickled and to raise my arms and to clap-clap-clap and applaud and to be entertained.

Worship, like prayer, is a “continual” process—not necessarily “continuous.” There is a difference.

Donnie</font>
Quote
Share