Thought for the day-new song 4

Part of the changes that the new birth spiritually will bring about in our lives will be some changes in our musicing.  Is there anything about the music that you listen to and perform that would hinder your spiritual life? As we mentioned yesterday, on this Easter Sunday we should all seek to remove any music that is not compatible with a whole-life philosophy that is Christocentric.

The New Song-part 4

      Today is Easter Sunday, the day that we celebrate Christ's resurrection.  Because He paid the price for the sins of the whole world, you and I are able to be a new creature in Christ Jesus and ipso facto can truly have a new song to sing. When we study new song in the Bible we learn that the words "new song" do not refer to a new composition but rather to a song of a higher or renovated character.  Psalm 40:1-3 identifies what the term new song means.  It states, "I waited patiently for the Lord, and he inclined unto me, and heard my cry.  He brought me up out of an horrible pit,  out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings.  And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it and fear, and shall trust in the LORD." There are several observations of this Scripture passage to be made that will influence our philosophical beliefs about the "new song" of the Bible..
       First, note that the word even is in italics in the A.V. which means that it is not found in the Hebrew text.  So, we learn that the  chadash (2319) shiyr(7892)  is without doubt  tehilah (8416)  Elohiym (430) i.e."a new song of praise to God".  The song of the "new man" is different than the song of the "old man" who was dead in trespasses and sins.  The Christian musician who is a new creature in Christ Jesus has a new song which is of a renovated character.  The psalmist's new life brought about a song of praise to God.  He performed music in a "new key", so to speak.  When he passed from death to life spiritually had a  new song, a new theme , a new "tune" and a new purpose in his musicing.  Why?  Because his music philosophy had changed because he was different on the inside. ( In our dispensation the new man is truly "born again".)
       Second, it appears that the psalmist David was writing of the time when God brought him out of the pit of sin (or noise) and established him musically and spiritually.  The Cambridge scholars put the words "a pit of noise" in the margin. Note that Elohiym the supreme God had to lift the musician out of a pit of noise before he could establish (kuwn 3559) the musician' s goings (ashur 838). Also  note that the God  had to remove the uproar or noise that surrounded the musician ( yaven -3121 tiyt -2916) with dregs dregs that swept him away i.e. hindered or held him down spiritually.  I believe that the sense and import of this statement is that he had to change the psalmists' music before he could establish him spiritually.

Thought for the day--new song 3

Have you ever considered why some Christian musicians cling so desperately to music styles that represent the "old life" of unregenerated man?  One of the best ways to break away from the "old life" of sin is to sing a new song!  Tomorrow is Easter Sunday. It is the day that represents Christ's victory over sin.  It is a day of re-beginning.  Why not establish a re-beginning of your music listening habits if they have a tendency to defeat you spiritually.

The New Song-part 3

           It matters  how a Christian presents the "New song"  which is mentioned in the Bible. What many Christian musicians have forgotten is that direction determines destiny.  If you start west on I 70 from Indianapolis Indiana in the USA, you will not arrive in Columbus, Ohio, no matter how much you desire to go there because you are going the wrong direction.  Getting a crowd’s attention by emphasizing the flesh will by no means draw them to Christ.  If a performer maximizes the physical, by doing so he or she minimizes the spiritual.  If a performer sings religious music and at the same time draws attention to the flesh, he or she will get a message across to the audience, but it will not be the "new song" of the gospel .  The reason one cannot successfully sell sacred things with the sensual is that it just won’t work. Galations 6:6-9 states:
       Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.  Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption: but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.  And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

      God’s ways are higher than the ways of the world. The "new song" of the Bible always takes the high road.  The world uses man’s depraved nature and man’s natural sexual appetite to sell  its music.  Why can’t Christians take advantage of man’s depraved nature and his natural sexual appetite for that matter to present the good news of the gospel? 

      One of the reasons  is that as Galatians 5:17 explains, “For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.”  The Galatian writer makes it very clear that the flesh and the spirit are contrary one to the other.  Therefore it is deceitful to gain people's attention with sexual innuendos and then present the "new song" which is the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ. 

      The Bible teaches that the flesh and the spirit are not compatible.  It is a mystery to me that so many Christian musicians are determined to try to present the "New song" and the lust of the flesh side by  side as a team of horses.  Placing the flesh and the spirit side by side is like placing a lion and a lamb in the same harness.  If one does, there is no doubt about it, the lion will eat the lamb.

           

 

Thought for the day-new song 2

Is there any difference between the music you listened too and performed before you were born again and the music you have in your life today?

The New Song--part 2

            The concept of “new song” in the Bible connotes music making that is of a higher or renovated character that always renders praise to God--not man.  II Corinthians 5:17 states, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away: and behold all thins are become new.”  A part of the old things that pass away is the “old song” and the old self-aggrandizement and worldly musical performance practice.

            If the essence of a musician’s music making is the presentation of self, then God cannot receive the preeminence.  The new man, singing "new song", in a new way, seeks to exalt Christ not self.  As we know, in the new song of the Bible, God receives all the praise all the time.  If our performance practice results in the lifting up of self and the performer’s talents, then the musician’s performance becomes merely religious music rather than sacred music.  Remember, in the beginning God created music for His honor and His glory.  

           Earlier we discussed ownership of music and were drawn to the conclusion that we do not own it.  Why?  Because music is God's creation, he holds the deed to its ownership.  So, since we are singing and playing HIS SONG, we relinquish the sense of ownership. When we were dead in trespasses and sins, as musicians, we thought we owned OUR  music.  We were autonomous when it came to OUR music praxis.  At least we acted like we were a law to our selves when we performed OUR music.  We sang OUR own song which was what I call "old song".  There is something wonderful about singing HIS song in HIS santuary for HIS glory.

Thought for the day-new song part 1

It should be no mystery that after a Christen's" new birth" spiritually he or she will have a "new song"  because this persan has a new heart and is a" new creature in Christ Jesus".

The New Song-part 1

     The words "new song" are mentioned in the Bible nine times.  In the Old Testament they are recorded six times in the Book Of Psalms (33:3, 40:3, 96:1, 98:1, 144:9, and 149:1) and once in Isaiah 42:10.  In the New Testament, new song is found only in the Book of Revelation 5:9 and 14:2.  Philosophers have not said much about the biblical principle of new song and I have never read after any music philosopher who even mentioned it.
     Writers on church music most often misunderstand these references and use them as proof texts to support the idea of contemporary Christian music.  Others suppose them to mean that we are commanded to compose new musical compositions.  Often in my musicof thr Bible class students have queried, "Are we required to write and perform new songs?" 
     There certainly is a continuing need for new music literature to meet the needs of the church today.  It is also a fact that if Christian musicians do not perform this new music, it will not get performed.  I am convinced that God is pleased when his "chief musicians" compose and arrange new music that follows Bible principles of musicing.   However I am convinced that these Bible references To "New Song" do not connote musical compositions that are "new" in relation to time.  These verses in the Bible have a different meaning and we will be discussing this meaning in the next few blog posts.

Thought for the day-Fallacies of philo part 10

Proverbs 3:6 states, "In all thy ways acknowledge (yada 3045- perceive or find out) him, and he shall direct (yashar 3474-keep straight) thy paths."  When I acknowledged Bible principles of music, I developed an understanding and an appropriate respect for what it said about music.  This proper respect and understanding has guided me in my musical journey.

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 10

       Yesterday we discussed whether or not all sacred and secular music is amoral(the condition of being indifferent to morality).  Any musician that believes that the music part of music is amoral, does not believe that music is capable of having any referential meaning related to the real world around us. Since music itself comes under nature (i.e. music is a natural phenomenon of God's creation) and not grace (the unmerited favor of God). The result is the pseudo-religious philosophical thought that the only thing that matters about music is the words.  So this notion supposes that, if one's music does not have words connected with it, the musician and his music are allowed to follow a philosophically independent pursuit.   Under this philosophical fallacy nature eats up grace since musicing slips out from under the Lordship of Christ. All of instrumental music is autonomous and all the music part of vocal music is autonomous except words.

       So, as has  been pointed out before and will be emphasized again, under this fallacy of philosophical thought, music doesn’t matter to God. God doesn’t have anything to say about instrumental music or much if anything to say about vocal music (except words). So, the Creator of the universe doesn’t have any authority over the “natural” aspects of music. Try for just a moment to conceptualize the great I AM who thought music into existence being indifferent to style and genre. This faulty view purports that God doesn't care about the music part of music.

Thought for the day-fallicies part 9

Commit all your philosophical questions concerning music to the Lord, you can trust Him!

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 9

             Another faulty philosophical  view is that both secular and sacred music do not come under the Lordship of Christ since all music is amoral.  By the term "amoral musically" we mean that  this view considers the whole of music to be always indifferent to morality.  This type of synthesis thinker often often believes that, “music is completely a matter of personal taste”.  Musicians who come to this conclusion accept the view of Thomas Aquinas that man is “fallen” from grace but not his intellect.  Aquinas believed that man needed God’s help in matters of grace, but that since he had not “fallen” in his intellect he could follow an intellectual path independent of the Lordship of Christ.  (see Francis Schaffer’s Escape From Reason)  So, man did not need God’s help in matters of the natural world which includes music. 

            What does this mean practically to a Christian musician?  This synthesis thinking produces Christian musicians who believe that there is nothing moral about moral music except words i.e. the music part of music is not efficacious morally.  This type of thinker usually believes that the music part of music has no meaning or that its meaning is encapsulated in a system of musical meaning that is esoteric and its meaning  is "music's meaninng alone".  This view is commonly known to music philosophers as "music is a closed system". If the previous statement seems confusing to you, it is because I believe the whole belief is confusing and faulty.  (We will consider this faulty view in a later post.)
        

Quote for the day fallac. of philo- Part 8

"There are no rebels in God's kingdom."  Rev. Larry Smith [my cousin thrice removed]  When I encounter a musician that prides himself or herself in rebelling against traditional church music values, which I contend are ancient "landmarks" of musicing unto God, I think of Rev. Smith's comment.

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 8

       Yesterday we discussed musical styles and whether or not they are equally appropriate for use in religious, and hopefully, sacred music. Mentioning musical style is one of the easiest ways to start a fight, except maybe to make fun of someone's grandmother and her homemade apple pie or better yet her apple strudel! 

        Today we are going to discuss another faulty view that all sacred music comes under the Lordship of Christ (since it is “unto God”) and that all secular music does not come under His Lordship (since the musicing  of secular music is not “unto God”).  On the surface, it would seem that this third view would be a better view since it does cover the whole of music.  Close scrutiny will reveal a major fallacy in this philosophical viewpoint:  it has an autonomous portion--that of secular music.  Since Christ is Lord of all our life, there is no area of a Christian’s life (including secular music) that is free from Christ’s authority.  As I have very briefly discussed before, no type of music is truly "absolute".  I understand that many music philosophers mean by the term "absolute music" merely that it is "music alone" i.e. music without a "program" or words.  Although I understand their definition, I contend that including the word "absolute" is a poor choice of words.  Do not hold your breath, but we will talk about this terminology later--at length!

       Meanwhile, let us return to our topic today. Whether music is or is not directly addressed to God is not the issue here.  Many people believe “you are what you eat” but ignore the fact that “you are what you hear” and “you are what you perform”. How did Christian musicians come to the conclusion that Christians are immune to the effects of the music they listen to and perform?  If any “musing” takes place in a person’s passive or active musicing, then it stands to reason that it will have a positive or negative effect on the whole life of that individual.  Therefore, both sacred and secular music matter very much. 
       Every style, genre, type, kind (or whatever term one  prefers to label it) comes under the ABSOLUTE lordship of God.  No Christian has the right to keep back a part of music as an autonomous portion to be consumed on one's self.  The personal enjoyment of different styles of music, within the limits discussed in an earlier post, is a perfectly legitimate phenomenon in the life of a Christian. However, he or she must remember that secular or sacred styles of music or the act of "doing" them or listening to them is never an autonomous phenomenon.

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 7

       Yesterday we defined the terms "sacred" and "secular music. Today the topic is musical style!  It is generally believed by a host of Christians that style is only a matter of taste.  It amazes me that so many Christians who are, what I would consider, extremely conservative in matters pertaining to lifestyle, are very liberal in their philosophical view of music styles.  I want to make it perfectly clear at the outset of this discussion that there is more than one style of music that is appropriate in the whole-life of a Christian.  Conversely, not all styles of music are, however, appropriate for a Christian to listen to or perform. A concomitant to the philosophic notion that style doesn't  matter to God  is the further faulty notion that music style is benign.  This faulty view opens the door to another notion that  since music is benign it is therefore incapable of saying anything at all.  The previous set of faulty conclusions leads to the faulty view that ,since music is benign, style is also benign and is of no consequence when it comes to spiritual understandings. 
         It is my hypothesis that all styles of music are not equally suited to use as worship or evangelistic music.  One of the reasons being that all styles of music are driven by some purpose and that purpose will lead to a specific musical conclusion.  It is naive to erroneously conclude that all composer's or arranger's musical works are driven by the same purpose or that all music composers or arrangers are trying to say the same thing with their music.  
        I believe in profundity in music and that some styles of music are without doubt more profound than others.  Since the message of Christ and the worship of the Trinity are very profound experiences, I believe that it makes sense to marry the message of Christ and worship of the Godhead with music that is profoundly suited to the awesomeness and solemnity of worship.  Therefore, style does matter and it matters in many more ways than we can cover in this brief post today.

Prayer on Palm Sunday

Lord today is the Sunday that we remember your triumphal entry into Jerusalem.  This Sunday, as we do every Sunday, we worship you in majesty.  Thank you for coming to earth to live, suffer and die for my sins and the sins of the whole world.  This day we not only remember that joyful day, but we also remember that this is the week  you suffered and died for our sins.  Lord, "lest I forget Gethsemane, lest I forget thine agony, lest I forget thy love for me, lead me to Calvary."   Lord , never let me forget what you have done for me.  Thank you for forgiveness if sins and for the peace that I have in my heart today.  Amen.

Thought for the day-philo fallicies part 6

Christian musicians must realize that"Sacred" instrumental musicing (the act of "doing"music)
 requires passing the tests of suitability, appropriateness, and Bible principles of musicing if a musician is going to develop a unified Christ centered music philosophy.

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 6

        Today we will discuss the false philosophical notion  that all religious music is acceptable unto the Lord.  We will not only we discuss this notion today but also at length in the future.  I contend that Christians should differentiate between music that merely has religious words and music that is truly sacred.  So in order to do so I will define both "religious" and "sacred" music. 
        By religious music, I mean any music that addresses itself to religious matters.  The song, “God is Watching Us”, is a religious song but it is far from being a sacred song.  It is religious in the fact that it speaks of god.  However, it is the epitome of “new age music”.  It speaks of an impersonal god who sees us only from an impersonal distance through rose-colored glasses.   And ,of course, he doesn't see  us closely or clearly. What kind of a god sees no wars and no disease?  Only a false god fails to see very clearly since he is incapable of being omniscient.  Certainly not the God who  "is", and is the great "I Am".  Not the God who is the judge of all the earth.  My Bible declares in Hebrews 4:15, "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are yet without sin."   
           Sacred music  is spiritual music that  has passed all of these tests of suitability, profundity , appropriateness, theological correctness and Bible principles of musicing.  Religious music does not require passing any tests because it is autonomous music that is the personal property of an autonomous church musician who is free from all constraint of the Bible and the Lordship of Christ.  It has no standard of profundity, correctness,appropriateness, or theological correctness.  So when you see the words “religious music” in this blog beware.  
           The conclusion of considering these two types of music is that the Christian musician should carefully select the music that is truly sacred music that will edify the believer and bring honor to the awesome God we love and worship.  The God who is "high and lifted up" deserves to be worshiped with music that will bring honor and glory to His name.

Thoughts for the day--fallacies of philo part 5

Many musicians believe that being a conservative Christian musician stifles a musician's creative musical progress . Having a Christocentric music philosophy and praxis never stifles creativity since we all know that a train always runs best when it is on a track.  Since a musician with a Christ centered music philosophy knows what he or she is doing, that musician is free (in the Holy Spirit) to develop a music praxis that will be pleasing unto the Lord. It is the autonomous musician that is "ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" musically. (See II Timothy 3:7)

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 5

       Yesterday we discussed our definition of what the word "secular" means when used in these philosophical posts. Today we will discuss whether to include or exclude secular music in the music of the whole-life of a Christian.  Yesterday we established that if secular music is suitable to the whole-life of a Christian it may be included. 
       Although it would be much simpler if musical choices were “either" "or”, such a basis for the inclusion or exclusion of  a particular type of music is much too simplistic and therefore faulty.  Although there is nothing morally wrong with excluding all music except sacred music, it certainly will impoverish the artistic life of all those who perform and listen to music.  Christ said in St. John 10:10b, “I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”  I believe that part of this perissos (4053- superabundance) of life  that St.John was referring to can be  the understanding and enjoyment that secular music (as defined above) can bring to the life of a Christian.
        I contend that God will provide the Christian musician (who follows the Bible's precepts of musicing and keeps what he or she hears and sees and does concerning the fine art of music under the Lordship of Christ)  musical joys and musical understandings that are a part of God's superabundant (perissos) life.  This Christian is then free to fully enjoy the beauty and import of God’s creation. 
        Those who exclude the great classics and other styles of music, of an even lesser degree of import and profundity, only deny themselves some of God’s purest pleasures and understandings afforded to those who enjoy the fine arts.  I believe that a part of abundant living is being able, with God’s guidance, to include many styles and types of music in the whole life of a Christian.  P.S.  Later, perhaps just before Easter we will be discussing Musical understanding in a nine or ten part series.

Thought for the day--philo fallacies part 4

Some people say that "You are what you eat"  I contend that "You are what you listen to musically."

Fallacies of philosophical thought--part 4

       Yesterday we discussed dealing with secular music in the process of music philosophy development. At this point a definition of secular music is necessary.  What is secular music?  When I use the term  "secular music", I only mean music that is temporal or that does not address itself to religious matters.  I never mean anti-Christ music or music that promotes social or moral rebellion or error of any kind.  All of us know that there are types of secular music that are in sharp contrast with living a Spirit filled life.  It is without argument that this type of music appeals to the lust of flesh rather than to pure thoughts.
       If the music itself (words excluded) does not appeal to the lust of the flesh and if it is clean (words included), I see no scriptural basis for excluding it from the life of a Christian.  I am not referring to secular rock music in my definition above.  Secular rock music is so much  a meta-language of filth that it should not be included as a good choice of secular music.
      Some secular styles of music are so associated with anti-Christ beliefs that they should not be a part of a Christian's performance or listening practice .  I contend that  association DOES MATTER in the life of one who is a born again Christian.  It is one thing to give mental assent to a changed life but it is another thing to actually change what we perform and listen to when we have passed from death to new life in the born again relationship with the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  Any honest Christian will admit to himself or herself that some types of music draw the Christian away from Spirit filled living.  Therefore it is a philosophical fallacy to believe that style and content do not matter. 

Quote for the day--fallacies of philo. -part 3

"Sometimes you can be right about a situation but be dead wrong in how you handle it." ( from my dear friend Rev. Don Davison)  So, I say be very careful with how you deal with your children or your students concerning music.

Fallacies of philosophical thought.--part 3

Yesterday we discussed the faulty notion that music can philosophically serve as a religion.  Today we will consider the faulty notion that the way to deal with the whole of music (i.e. both sacred and secular) is to ignore half of it.  These Christians seem to believe that if we ignore secular music it will go away.  So they stick their philosophical necks in the sand and like good ostriches they can’t see it or hear it on MTV, in live concert performances , or hear it on recordings.  Now this philosophy is simple isn’t it?  Yes it is – too simple.  It is a fact that while adults have their heads in the sand they really don’t have to deal with it. However ignoring secular music completely is never the correct Praxis.

 However, much to their chagrin, when they come up for food and water, they can’t help but notice their offspring dancing, and musicing to the beat of this music that doesn’t exist.  Why doesn’t this music exist?  It doesn’t exist because they chose to believe that it doesn’t affect  their family.Christian school , Christian college or church . 

 While they were refusing to deal with secular music philosophically, their children have purchased a whole stack of this stuff.  The reason we know that secular music really exists is because their children are deeply involved with it.  Since these parents  and Christian music educators have had their head in the sand, they have no lucid defense for or against secular music. They have never set logical, sane guidelines for the inclusion or exclusion of secular music.  So, they take the easy way out.  Their solution is to get rid of all secular music
            Now we have a bona fide musical generation gap on our hands. The children rebel and at this point, a series of yelling matches will probably take place.  Why?  Because the parents have not developed a lucid music philosophy that covers the whole of music.  (See Chapter 13 of my book, Church Music Matters).

Thought for the day-falacies-part 2

I love to hear and perform music very much, but it is not my religion or my God!

Fallicies of philosophical thought.-part 2

Today I was listening to an FM radio station that plays classical  music.  One of the station's listeners was explaining his personal interest in the station's music.  What he said made my musical blood boil.  He stated, " People look to classical music in the same way they view religion. They look to it with a sense of awe.  So, then, music is my religion." Immediately I recoiled at that statement, but now that I have settled down a bit, I wonder what made him make that statement?
       How did he come to that recognition?  What have we done as a culture to open "Pandora's Box" philosophically?  How can a musician become  deceived and depraved  enough to falsely believe that music can take the place of God?  How can a musician so stand in awe of music to let it become his god?  Immediately my thoughts go to Romans 2:28, "And even as they did not like to retain God in there knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate [adokimos 96--unapproved]  mind..."  As you know,  postmodern musicians most often do not even consider God in any part of their musical  knowledge or understanding of music philosophy.
       Romans 1:20-22 states, "For the invisible things [music is an invisible part of God's creation] of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened, Professing themselves to be wise they became fools."  When you open Pandora's Philosophical Box, musically speaking, and do not believe that God created and owns music, it is quite easy to falsely conclude that one can love and worship music and ipso facto embrace music as one's religion. 
       At this point, I am reminded of another Scripture verse found  in Romans 1:25, "Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature[ ktisis 2937--the created thing] rather than the creator[kitzo 2936--the one who created i.e. music]."  Now we can conceptualize how a musician who has left God completely out of his knowledge and understanding of music can fallaciously deduce that one can worship music as a religion.

Thought for the day fallacies part 1

A Christian musician should learn what is right philosophically by studying music in the Bible.  However, When developing a Christocentric music philosophy, one should understand  the fallacies of musical philosophy.

Fallacies of philosophical thought-part 1

There are a number of prevalent philosophical fallacies concerning the whole of music.  First, there are those who believe that Christians should only perform and listen to religious music since “my raptured soul can only sing of Calvary”.  This incomplete view chooses to ignore secular music as though it doesn’t exist.  This notion leads indirectly to another philosophical fallacy. 
The second belief is that all religious music is acceptable unto the Lord i.e. that all music with acceptable religious words is proper for public and private worship.  A third faulty view is that all sacred music comes under the Lordship of Christ (since it is “unto God”) and that all secular music is autonomous (since it is not “unto God”). 
 The fourth faulty view is that all music, sacred or secular, does not come under the Lordship of Christ since it is amoral.  They equate music with the choice of whether to write with a black or blue ballpoint pen.  You would not have to seek the Lord’s will before you wrote with either color since it does not involve a moral, social, or financial issue. Fifth, they worship music and it actually consider it to act as religion.

 In the next few posts, we will explore all four of these faulty philosophical views.  Part of the Christians responsibility to walk "circumspectly" when it comes to music philosophy is to not on.y know the truth but to also recognize error.   The preface to the famous musical discourse in Ephesians five states:  "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience [unbelief-Cambridge margin].  Be not ye partakers with them.  For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) proving what is acceptable unto the Lord"

Ephesians 5:6-10

Part 9-What may happen...removing landmarks

 

Part 9-What may happen after we have removed the ancient landmarks.

         The last thing that I would ever wish to do would spend my time preparing posts for this music philosophy blog that always predict gloom and doom for the future of church music.  However in the musical discourse of Ephesians chapter five, verses fifteen and sixteen warn Christians to, “See that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.”  When I was being trained in the U.S Army, our instructors drilled us on the concept that, when we were part of a  patrol, everyone must walk circumspectly.  That means that, as you walk, you must look around at all times in all directions.  Certainly that training has proven valuable to me over the past forty years as a conservative Christian musician.  Every time in my life that I have made the conscious decision to exercise caution instead of disregarding time honored principles of musicing unto God, I have been thankful later.

       What will we have of value after we remove all the time honored principles of musicing from public worship.   One thing for sure, we will not recognize public worship in one generation if we as Christian musicians do not exercise some musical caution about adding the profane and subtracting everything traditional from our music worship. There are Bible principles of how to music unto God.  We may deny that they are in the Bible or we may consider them to have outlived their relevance, but that will never change the fact that they are there and they are profitable to us in the twentieth century.
        We know that the kind and quality of musical offering matters to God.  We know that according to God’s Word, He reserves the right not to hear some offerings and He considers others to be noise and states that He will not hear such musicing.  We have considered these and other Bible principles of musicing in other posts of this blog and in my two books, Music of the Bible in Christian Perspective and Church Music Matters.  So, in conclusion, we may remove all traditional ways of musicing  from our so called "worship" but if we do we will be worshiping "we know not what".  We will also be impoverished spiritually by removing these time honored Bible principles of worshiping through music.

 

Thought for the day-what may happen-Part 9

When I have finished my work here on this earth, I want to be remembered as a Christian musician who had a positive influence on musical worship.  The worst thing that I could think of would be to be remembered as one who helped to destroy Christian worship.

Thought for the day --What may happen-part 8

I question using styles of music that were composed to appeal to the lust of the flesh to represent the love of our blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Part 8-What may happen...retasking music.

 

Part 8-What may happen if we try to re-task music styles. 

       Re-tasking music styles is a pseudo-religious philosophical music notion that originated in the last quarter of the twentieth century.  The epitome of this notion is that “we should not let the Devil get all the best tunes”.  First of all, whoever established the fact that the Devil has use of the best tunes?  This little discussion is certainly not the platform to display all the thousands and thousands of wonderfully composed musical compositions that have been used for God’s glory over many centuries.  So, the little quip used by CCM enthusiasts merely shows their lack of knowledge of the history of church and sacred concert music. 

       Furthermore, the inept comparisons of G.F. Handle’s Italian soprano  duets (which he later rearranged into the marvelous four part chorus “For unto us a child is born”) with hard rock music (that was composed to appeal to the lust of the flesh and later supposedly sanctified for the love of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ) again show a complete misunderstanding of Handel’s compositional style.  There was absolutely no conflicting contradistinction in the compositional style between his soprano duets and the message or the music of his oratorio “Messiah”.  To put is very clearly, there was absolutely nothing about the words of the original duets or the style that they were written in that  brought attention to the lust of the flesh.  Also, the well known fact that parts of “Messiah” were eclectic is certainly no evidence for re-tasking hard rock music.

        While we are on the subject of re-tasking music, the written statements of CCM enthusiasts that Wesley’s “Songs of the Foundry” were bawdy drinking songs are simply  ludicrous, since we know that the “Songs of the Foundry” were songs composed during the time they were worshiping in the old foundry which was close to where Wesley’s Church and home now stand in London. These songs had absolutely nothing to do with the rough drinking foundry workers.

        So, Handel’s use of previously composed music and Wesley’s “Songs of the Foundry” are not proof comparisons that justify CCM’s strong desire to justify inappropriate juxtaposition of music style with religious words. I contend that re-tasking is risky and in many cases simply the wrong way to music unto our Lord and Savior. My objection is on the basis of style and also the association that surrounds the use of some styles of music.  These two topics will be covered thoroughly at a later date. 

 

Thought for the day-What may happen-part 7

If a music minister's musicing pleases God and at the same time people are pleased, this musician is not a "man pleaser".  However, if a musician's purpose is to please the people and not God, he or she is a "man pleaser".

Part 7-What may happen...musical tastes

 

Part 7-What may happen if we try to cater to everyone’s musical tastes.  

       No musician that I know ever thinks, "I’m going to sing this song just to annoy the congregation.”  Every sensitive ministering musician desires that the congregation will enjoy and appreciate his or her music ministry.  However, the Bible is very clear about whom we should please.  Galatians’ 1:10 states, “For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I speak [sing] to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be a servant of Christ.” (The word in the brackets is mine.) 

       I contend that any music praxis that is based on pleasing the “seeker” or the believer is a faulty praxis.  There is nothing inherently wrong with saint or sinner being pleased with our musical offerings, but our praxis must be built on pleasing God.  In our posts on worship we discussed the fact that the unregenerate cannot truly worship God.  We also discussed that the Holy Spirit can use worship music to convict the sinner. 

       When the Holy Ghost is doing His “office work” of locating and convicting the unregenerate man or woman, they will probably be anything but pleased by music that is convicting them of the awfulness of their sins.  Just like the pastor’s preaching of “Christ crucified” does not make the sinner joyful, the effectual fervent singing of “Christ crucified” will not make the unregenerate comfortable in the presence of a just God who will not overlook sin and rebellion against Him!

       So, a music philosophy that is developed to make the sinner feel OK is just not OK.  Man outside of the forgiveness of sins is far from OK.  Effectual anointed musicing should never be psychologically designed to connote that “I’m OK and you’re OK.  The philosophical notion that worship music should be about “us”, “me”, “my”, and “mine” is nothing less than religious humanism which is no better than secular humanism.  As we have pointed out many times, worship music is about God and our response to Him.  The notion that the church should cater to my likes and dislikes is essentially humanistic music philosophy because under this praxis, music begins and ends with me. Under this type of thinking, man receives the preeminence.
        So to sum this all up philosophically, we should worship God through our musicing in a manner that will be pleasing unto God.  Furthermore, being seeker sensitive is not about singing music that un-regenerated man will like.  It is totally different to sing music that a sinner will understand than it is to build a music worship praxis on music that he or she will like.

 

Thought for the day-What may happen-part 6

When I face Him whose eyes are as a flame of fire at the judgment, I want to be sure that the musical offerings that I presented unto God were not profane.

Part 6-What may happen...sacred & profane music

 

Part 6-What may happen if we do not distinguish between sacred and profane music. 

   There isn’t much use for a church musician to distinguish which music is sacred or profane if he or she does not make a sincere effort to exclude that which is profane from music worship.  If the criterion for a music’ inclusion is the will of the people, the church’s musicing will constantly be enduring the music minister’s leader shift.  Dr. Richard S. Taylor put the whole matter in proper perspective when he explained,  

The fact that some people may like this or that is not sufficient reason for the church to use it.  The church should lead the way in such standards, not abjectly follow every fad and custom which happens to be “in” at the moment.  The Church has no business adopting the philosophy, “If you can’t lick ‘em, join ‘em.”  We should be governed by basic and eternal principles.  There are music forms, whether secular or sacred, which create moods of pensiveness, or idealism, or awareness of beauty, of aspiration, and of holy joyousness.  There are forms of music which create moods of recklessness and sensual excitement.  Surely it doesn’t take much judgment to know which forms are most appropriate for religious function. 1    

       Only the essential nature and value of a piece of music gives it the honor of being considered as sacred music.  Therefore, each piece of music must pass the tests of Bible principles of musicing before it makes its way into Sunday morning worship.  As Christian musicians carefully consider the nature and value of all the music use in musicing unto God, a clear line of demarcation between what is truly sacred and what is definitely profane will become evident.  It is the volumes and volumes of music that is “sort of” or “kind of” that is so difficult to categorize into that which is or is not appropriate for “religious function”.  So, since there is such a multitude of religious music that is biblically accurate, appropriate and clearly to be classified as sacred, the short answer is “when in doubt leave it out”.  There is absolutely no excuse for using any music that is questionable stylistically or inaccurate theologically. 

---

1 A Return to Christian Culture, p.87  Richard S. Taylor

 

 

Thought for the day-What may happen-part 5

Perhaps the greatest gift that a minister of music can have is the gift of "helps".  This gift will keep the minister of music from thinking that the music part of worship is the high point or the climax of the worship service.

Part 5-What may happen... not singing in Worship

 

Part 5-What happens if we don’t sing at all in worship?

       Singing is without doubt an ancient landmark of worshiping God.  In my estimation no body of believers has the right to deny worshipers the privilege of responding to God through musicing unto Him.  Admittedly, over  many centuries the church at large has had a tendency to vacillate when it comes to congregational singing. Regardless of what a particular church thinks about the necessity of responding to God through singing at a particular time, singing is an ancient landmark of worship.

        The Bible repeatedly commands Christians to sing unto the Lord.  Psalm 30:4, 96:1&2, 98:1&4, 135:3, I Ch. 29:30, II Ch, 16:23 are just a few of the verses that command us to sing unto the Lord. The Hebrew is so very clear in these verses that it seems no one has been able to translate around this truism—singing is a definite part of worship God’s children from ancient times until this very day.

       Some ministers have mistakenly considered singing to be almost the whole of public worship.  Throughout the Bible, singing was a part of worship but not the end of worship. One of the Bible principles of musicing is that singing  since ancient Israel has been the handmaiden of the Torah.  The te’amim were placed in all of the O.T. Scriptures in order that the entire O.T. could be sung.  Nehemiah 8:8 has, over many centuries, become an esoteric reference to the intoning the Scrolls with the use of the te’amim. 
       The Hebrew word parash (6567) which has been rendered distinctly in the A.V. means to separate or literally to disperse.  Intoning (singing) the Holy Writ with what we now know to be a precise notation (the te’amim) helped in bringing preciseness to God’s written Word.  The same verse uses the Hebrew word biyn (995) which has been translated in the A.V. with a group of English words “and caused them to understand”.  So, when when we bring all these thoughts together we can see that singing the Word of God helped to bring greater understanding to the hearer.  Now you know the “rest of the story” about ancient intoning of Scripture.  There is a very valid reason for singing God’s Word if our musicing helps to make the Word more clear to the congregation.

       This also brings to mind that there is great responsibility placed on those who lead musical worship to make absolutely sure that all of the music sung is biblically accurate.   That was probably the reason John Calvin was so adamant about singing Psalms, and it was exactly why John Wesley once instructed the society of Christians called Methodists to, “Sing no songs of your own composing”. In review, we have considered that the commandment to sing unto the Lord is clear in Scripture.  There is no doubt that we should sing biblically accurate songs in our public worship.  If we do not we will certainly impoverish those whom we lead in worship.

Thought for the day-what may happen-part 4

Instead of being obsessed with the latest trend in Church music, the  music minister should accept the God given responsibility to be true to the task of musicing in "spirit" and "truth".

Part 4-What may happen...becoming trendy

 

Part 4-What may happen when we become trendy with our musicing.

       First, it would be a good idea if we would define the term “Trendy”.  Something is considered to be trendy when it has the predilection to follow a current dominant movement.  I suppose the near opposite of trendy would be the inordinate passion to only revere what is seriously antique.  All of us have seen both extremes in church music.  It should be pointed out that there is nothing inherently wrong with new music and likewise there is a large repertoire of time honored church music that still is valid, useful, and meaningful today.

       If new and old music are both proper for public worship, then is this post much ado about nothing? There are problems with dropping everything in music that is traditional for that which is in vogue at the moment.  Churches have made sudden musical decisions like one church that I know of in central Ohio that made some very rash decisions in an effort to become trendy.   A friend of mine visited their sanctuary and was informed by the pastor that one of the church members had cut all the wires to their $80,000 dollar pipe organ.  When asked if they had a piano, the pastor pointed to a large object covered up at the side of the church platform.  Sure enough it was their nine foot grand piano.  Both of these fine musical instruments had been replaced with a $4,000 dollar keyboard and a drum trap set in one desperate effort to become seeker sensitive. The musical instruments went first but I understand that the church’s fine sanctuary choir was the next thing to disappear from the sanctuary.

        Although it is possible to be seeker sensitive without a church choir, piano or organ, they do not keep a fellowship of believers from caring about folks who are not Christians.  So what happens to the church next after the ministering music organizations and the quality music instruments get the axe?  What happens if a church desires to have a ministering concert pianist come for an instrumental worship service?  Do you ask this artist to humble himself or herself and play your tiny electronic keyboard? I contend that once a fellowship of believers heads down the path of following music trends, there is no stopping place.  The church becomes a hostage of the latest musical notion. 

       My suggestion is to not allow the church to get squeezed into the world’s latest trendy notion of what the church can or cannot do musically in public worship. Although there is certainly nothing inherently wrong with doing something new musically in worship, doing something new will not necessarily fix all the church's worship problems.  Do not drop everything time honored in a desperate effort to make musicing unto God a trendy experience.  If you do you will probably be left out in the musical cold when the trendy winds began to blow another direction.

 

Thought for the day-destructive change part 3

Perhaps the reason that music ministers are spending much time thinking outside the box musically is because they have failed to think inside the box about music worship. 

Part 3-What may happen...destructive change

 

Part-3-What may happen if we do not resist destructive change. 

       First of all, a Christian musician should not resist change merely because it involves new music or a new way of musicing unto God.  Every new method and all new music must meet the biblical criteria of musicing unto God.  We know that God does have an opinion about the appropriateness of the offerings we bring unto Him. (See Genesis 4:4 and Leviticus chapters 4 & 5 and Romans 12:1).  It goes without saying that it is sometimes very difficult to discern whether or not something new will meet the biblical criteria of musicing unto a triune God.  However, most of the time it is not difficult.

        To a conservative minister of music, new music and new techniques are always “suspect” until they pass all the Bible principles of musicing unto God.  For that matter, all old music must meet the same standards if it is to be used.  Yesterday’s post mentioned the Karaites passion to “build up a wall around the Torah.”  Today we are discussing a conservative music minister’s passion for “building up a wall around musicing unto God”.  If true ministers of musicing unto God do not protect our Bible based traditions of musical worship, it will not be very long (it just takes one generation) until we will not recognize public music worship.

        It is believed by some music scholars that the Levite musicians of ancient Israel kept the musical notation (the te’amim) in the abbreviated manuscripts called the Serugin so that the music melodies of the O.T. would not be vilified.  Modern day ministers of music have the right and responsibility to protect church music in the fear of the almighty God who thought music into existence.  If we do not conserve the ancient landmarks of music worship, who will?

        I sometimes think about the milk cows my father kept in the west pasture of the farm that I grew up on years ago.  My father always kept the hedge brush cut down and planted fescue, red clover, brome, and other grasses so that our milk cows would have quality grass to eat.  However, I remember coming home from school in the evening and seeing some of our cows with their heads pushed through the tightly stretched barbed wire fence.  I still remember seeing their necks bleeding as they incessantly pushed through the barbed wire trying to get to a wild onion just outside the fence.  There was absolutely no need for them to reach for the onions because THERE WAS HIGH QUALITY NOURISHMENT INSIDE THE FENCE.  This is the mental picture I get of many post-modern church musicians today.  There are wonderful old and new hymns and worship choruses available to them, but they are incessantly reaching outside of the quality musical provisions available to them for a musical “wild onion”.

        Some present day church musicians seem to have no interest in being careful which styles of music they use in musicing unto God.  It isn’t that they have set different limits of which styles music they consider appropriate for worshiping God, they are no longer setting any limits. They have no interest in “Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.”  When a post-modern church musician makes no difference between what is proper and not proper for the awesomeness and solemnity of worshiping the Trinity music ministry becomes independent of the Lordship of Christ.

 

Thought for the day-what may happen-part2

The ancient Karaites spent their lives protecting the Torah.  We need some modern musical "Karaites" who will feel responsible to protect music worship.

Part 2-What may happen...resisting change

Part 2-What may happen if we resist all change in music.

       By definition, a conservative tries to “conserve”.  The Christian musician who is really conservative is concerned about holding on to our biblically based music values.  Notice that I said biblically based music values, not traditional music values.  Traditions change and there is nothing inherently wrong with man’s traditions being changed.  The mere fact that some music tradition has been associated with a certain fellowship of believers certainly does not make it “True Truth”, or even a valuable worthy tradition. 

       The Karaites, a Jewish sect that came into being at the beginning of the eighth century were characterized by their belief that the Scriptures were the only source of religious law.  They chose to accept the Scriptures as the only “true truth” to the exclusion of Rabbinical tradition.  So, if I understand this concept correctly, the Karaites were Scriptural traditionalists who fought against some of the traditions established by Rabbinic law.  What resulted was a fight over tradition. Rabbinic Judaism was contending for the long collected traditions which had been laid down in layer after layer and the Karaites purposed to “build up a wall around the Torah”.

        What we can learn from this ancient fuss over tradition is that we need to be sure the traditions we contend for are truly ancient Bible landmarks of musicing unto God. It is possible that some of our musical “sacred cows” might be better left dead than resurrected.  Not everything that the previous generations of church musicians did musically was an actual ancient landmark of worship.  However, all that being said, much of what they did do is time honored and if these principles of music worship are abandoned the church will certainly be impoverished musically and spiritually.

 

Thought for the day-What may happen-part 1

A Christian Musician without a music philosophy is like a ship on the Atlantic ocean without a rudder.

Part 1-What may happen-Music philosophy

 

Part 1- What may happen if we do not develop a music philosophy.

       It has been quite a while since we discussed the importance of developing a music philosophy.  There is a need for all churches, Christian colleges and universities, Christian schools and individuals to develop a series of systematic statements concerning the nature and value of the whole of music.  Although there are many web sites representing churches, Christian colleges and universities, many of them say absolutely nothing about music philosophy let alone publishing a systematic Bible based music philosophy.  Those who have thought out what they actually believe about the nature and value of music and have published their philosophic views concerning the deepest levels of what God honoring musicing is all about and why this music is estimable to them are to be applauded.

       Every Christian organization must understand music at its deepest levels if they are going to have an effective music witness in this post-modern world.  It is one thing for an individual to not bother to think music’s nature and value through philosophically, but it entirely another to try to guide others in the area of music’s nature and value without a thorough understanding of musical truth.  One of the reasons that many Christian organizations fail to develop a music philosophy is that they do not believe that there is any objective truth or Bible basis concerning music’s nature and value.  Some Christians have the notion that music philosophy is somewhat like jello gelatin i.e. that you can’t pin its meaning down because it is never stable.

       A surprising number of Christians believe that the more than 600 references to music are somehow dispensational and have out lived their meaning.  Although they would not admit it, they seem to believe that II Timothy 3:16 means, “All scripture [unless it is addressing music] is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”  One of the reasons that so many Christian musicians are without  answers concerning the nature and value of the whole of music is that they have not developed an epistemology [the theory and limits of “knowing”] and methodology [the system used to establish “knowing”]. For a much more thorough discussion of this topic see chapter three of my book, Church matters A music Philosophy in Christian perspective, Salem Ohio, Schmul Publishing Co., 2005.

        So, what happens if one does not have a congruent philosophy of music is many times that one will go in a  musical direction without much “understanding” or “knowing”.   Such an organization  either tries to cater to everyone’s likes and dislikes or the exact opposite—they cater to whatever direction the music leader prefers at any given moment.  The organization goes this way for a while then undergoes a “leader shift” and suddenly chooses a new notion in an attempt to be current or trendy.

Thought for the day-Music Organizations-part 4

Retasking music to salvage it for sacred music use muddies the waters of musical  "understanding".

Music Organizations-part 4

              Learn to  make music unto the LORD

        II Chronicles 23:13 states, "And she (Athaliah) looked, and, behold, the king stood at his pillar at the entering in, and the principles (sar 8269 ) and the trumpets by the king: and all the people of the land rejoiced, and sounded with trumpets, also the singers with instruments of musick, and such as taught (yada 3045) to sing praise (halal 1984 ). "

       The portion of the verse  that I want to explain to you is “such as taught to sing praise” The word translated taught in the AV is yada which comes from a primitive root work meaning “to know”.  This teacher "knew", was aware, was cunning,  and had knowledge of the proper way to sing praise (see I Chronicles chapter 25).  He also was able to discern how to teach others to sing praise.  He could perceive because he too was instructed in the songs of the LORD.   It is one thing for a church music organization member to not know how to minister musically, but it is another to be "under the hands" of a director who does know how to minister efficaciously and not take advantage of that knowledge.

        The Temple music directors mentioned in the first book of Chronicles were not trying out the latest Hivite style music or how to sing the songs of the Lord  in the style of the Philistine's  but were instructing those "under their hands" to sing the songs of the LORD.    If you are ministering under this kind of music director, learn from him or her how to music effectively.

     The words  sing praise in the AV are translated from the Hebrew word halal which means to be clear or to celebrate.  He did not sing the re-tasked secular music of Sumer and Akad but rather the music considered appropriate for the house of God.  This we know from chapter twenty-five of I Chronicles.  The Bible message given here is very clear,  In Ancient Israel they made a difference in the sacred and the profane.  Learn from a director who distinguishes between the sacred and the profane.  There is a difference between music that is truly "sacred" and music that is "profane".  I Believe that God inhabits praise music that is appropriate for the awesomeness and solemnity of worshiping a triune God who is" high and lifted up"(see Isaiah 6:1).

Thought for the day- music organizations part 3

Have you thought about the fact that an entire rehearsal can be a time of worship for the church musician who has spiritual understanding of the music?

Music organizations-part 3

 

       Today we are going to discuss four ways to make the musicing of a church choir or orchestra more meaningful. It is obvious that vocal music is less abstract when it comes to musical meanings, but all music has meaning.
1. Music directors should explain spiritual meanings in the music which is being performed and church musicians should apply these meanings in the rehearsals and in the church services . [Remember we are commanded to sing with spirit (pneuma-4151) and understanding (nous-3563) ]. You will note that I said apply these meanings in the rehearsal as the music is learned. Always remember that "The God of performance is also the God of rehearsal". If you worship in rehearsal, it will never be difficult to express the spiritual meanings of the music as you perform it in a church service. If you find rehearsal to be somewhat boring, try worshiping as you rehearse!

2. One of the ways that church musicians are able to make wise ministry decisions as to which selections are the best choices for musical ministry is to scrutinize prospective pieces of music for not only what they say but also what they fail to say spiritually.

3. Ephesians 5:10 commands church musicians to “prove what is acceptable unto the Lord.” Verses 15 & 16 continue with “see that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.” Church musicians must be sure that the music they offer to God is theologically correct and that it has enough expository depth to catechize both believers and non-believers.

  4. Music organization members should be like Chenaniah who had burden (massa-4853) for song borne in upon him of God. He instructed about the song because he was skillful, i.e. he was an accomplished musician. Music organization members must allow directors to pass musical meanings along to the them since they are “under his hands.” In order for this to happen, church choir and orchestra members, and soloists must be teachable and must to constantly be responsive to the spiritual aspects of the music presented by the director.