Church Music

God created us with a wide range of emotions. These emotions are all good and all have a proper expression in a proper context. These emotions are part of the image of God that we have the distinct
privilege to reflect and enjoy. To say that something is evil simply because it appeals to the flesh is to deny the innate goodness of these emotional (fleshly) feelings. Remember, context is the key in indulging these emotions, but also remember that theologically and biblically speaking, these emotions do have their proper place and bring glory to God when enjoyed there (and only there). Music, perhaps more than any thing else, powerfully connects with these emotional feelings.

I do not believe that we can categorize music as right and wrong based on the way it sounds or how it makes us feel. I do believe we can categorize music as appropriate and inappropriate for a given context based on the way it sounds. Let me explain. Chris Tomlin writes some of my favorite contemporary songs ("How Can I Keep from Singing," "Mighty Is the Power of the Cross") but, in my opinion, he makes a big blunder with "All Bow Down." The music is praise music - joyful, uplifting, makes you want to move - but the words are worship. The feeling associated with praise is obvious; the feeling associated with worship is humility. The lyrics say, "here comes the King, all bow down" (worship, humility), but the music makes me want to celebrate. That doesn't work. I'm not saying it's sinful, I'm just saying it doesn't work. I understand that there is a certain degree of subjectivity in that statement, but musicians agree that there are some universals here as well. If you don't believe them just ask a two-year old why he dances to some songs and not to others.

We have the liberty and biblical precedent to enjoy a wide variety in our church music. Psalm 150 names basically every instrument in existence at the time. We are to use all of our resources for the glory of our God. Surely this principle does not exclude musical ability. Music is meant to praise God, worship God, stir our hearts for action, and turn our hearts toward reflection. If we are serious about this, our music needs to make sense. I don't get into the old/new, hymn/chorus debates. Church music should touch on all of the Christian life, and to do that, it must make sense both lyrically and musically. There is good and bad in just about every genre and era of Christian music out there. My aim is to use the best I can find to bring glory to God. My view of music in a nutshell: the church should do music on purpose.

Worship

Is worship what happens when The David Crowder Band and Chris Tomlin get together in a stadium full of college students? Is worship what happens on Sunday when we sing together... when we pass the offering plate... when the pastor preaches... when we skip church to pray in our boat at the lake? Worship is clearly a huge part of our Christian vocabulary - so much so that we can lose its meaning in our familiarity with it. So, what does the Bible say about worship?

While there are a handful of Greek and Hebrew words commonly translated as worship in our English translations the overwhelming majority of these references come from the Hebrew, shachah, and the Greek, proskuneo. These words almost synonomously mean "to bow down," or "to prostrate oneself." One lexicon explains the idea as, "to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to a high authority figure." Thus, the meaning appears to be very broad in terms of form, but very narrow in terms of substance. The important thing is the attitude of the heart. For clarity it is helpful to look at this meaning in contrast with another Greek word often translated as worship in the New Testament. Sebomai is used only 10 times. The word refers to expressing worship through acts of ceremony. Jesus used sebomai in Matthew 15:9 and Mark 7:7 where he said the Pharisees worship him in vain "teaching as doctrines the commandments of men." In other words, "lacking the humility of true worship their ceremonies mean nothing." Or, "true worship strips us of our legalistic pride in thinking that these ceremonial acts impress God." Worship is not about the event, especially when the life style is not in agreement with what is said in the worship act.

So what does Biblical worship look like? It looks like a penitent heart humbly expressing to God a desperate need for Him. This can and should be communicated through silence, prayer, song, reflection, study, preaching, giving, serving, and every thought or action we give ourselves to in a particular day. It can and should be done corporately but that event only means anything if it is done first privately on a consistent basis. Sunday morning worship only works if the worshipers have been worshiping Monday through Saturday. If not it is sebomai, not proskuneo. Sunday should be the overflow, not the goal. Sunday should be an expression to God of our corporate need for him and submission to him, not an experience we wish to get something out of.

Obviously, this has direct implications for church music. But, that will have to wait for the next post.

Church and Culture

A website asks the question, "Is your church reflecting the culture or shaping it?" It is a fair question, but my response is different than what they are going for. The American Heritage Dictionary defines culture as, "The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought." That is more or less all inclusive of a people group. Does the church necessarily want to change all of that about every culture? By this definition things that influence culture will be industry, climate, history, and many other factors just as morally benign. Culture is who people are. So I ask, "If your church does not reflect elements of the culture, aren't you potentially legalistic?" Is it necessary or even preferable for a church to have their own style of music, dress, art, communication... that is totally foreign to the community in which they exist? We don't ask this of our missionaries. In fact, we strongly discourage this in missionaries. We expect them to learn their new culture and contextualize (please don't read too much theology into my use of that word) the Gospel into it as seamlessly as possible. Why do we think ministry should be any different state-side?

I understand that the doctrine of separation demands abstanence from certain elements of culture. Our society is increasingly sensual in entertainment and dress. But, this does not mean that we must never watch TV or should dress like the Amish. Our society worships recreation as a god. But, this does not mean that Christians can never play video games or go to the lake. Our culture produces a lot of music that is contrary to Biblical morality. But, this does not mean that guitars and drums are evil.

We need to remember that everything we hold traditional was once new and probably very contraversial. We also need to remember that to reach our neighbors we have a Biblical precedent to think like missionaries. The Great Commission demands it! We also need to remember that we are all probably emersed in the Christian subculture more than we think and need to extend grace and patience to other Christians as we progress together towards Christ-likeness.

Translations

Having once held to the KJVO position I am well aware of the difficulty surrounding this topic. There are textual issues, transmition and preservation issues, translator issues, and faith issues, to name just a few. Frequently there is also a strong emotional element as seen in some of the book titles from this point of view such as, "Touch Not the Unclean Thing," and "Settled in Heaven." I am not even going to attempt to resolve such issues in a blog format. If we agree, great. If we strongly disagree I am not going to try to change your mind. If you are kind of KJV, or KJV and not sure why, send me an e-mail. I'd love to discuss this with you. For every one else here is where I stand without (too much) additional commentary.

My absolute favorite translation to date is the English Standard Version. I like the New American Standard, the Revised Standard, the Holman Christian Standard, and the New King James pretty well. I'm not particularly fond of the NIV for various reasons, but, I think the translators did a great job in what they set out to do. I don't have a problem preaching from the old KJV where the congregation uses it as their standard. The KJV has a beautiful history and tradition that I do not wish to diminish, but for the sake of the modern reader I acknowledge and appreciate the wonderful contribution of contemporary scholarship. Regardless which translation is read during the preaching, the preacher has a responsibility to the Word of God as it exists in the original languages. So, NIV, KJV, ESV... the important thing is to understand what God said and what that means in real life.

How sovereign is God?

Given the countless volumes of books and two millennia of debate on the issue I have no illusions of resolving the fight here on blogspot, but I’ll at least try to let you know where I stand.

The word itself is often misunderstood. Nations are sovereign. Kings are sovereign. Sovereignty has to do with autonomous authority. Therefore, to say that God is sovereign is to say that he has absolute authority in and of himself. Though unintentional we usually think of his sovereignty in conjunction with his omnipotence. Not only does he have absolute authority, but absolute power to act on it. Those who get angry at the notion of his sovereignty are often unwittingly thinking in terms of omnipotence while ignoring the real issue – is God just in exercising absolute authority? One would have to deny the body of Scripture in its entirety to answer this question negatively. Colossians 1:16 is one of many passages that teach that everything was created by God, here specifically referencing the second person of the Godhead. Not only does it say all things but specifically addresses the world systems – thrones, rulers, etc. Christ, being the creator has authority over these things, as the verse declares this creation was not only through Christ, but for Christ. Even you and I were created through him and for him … so yes of course he is just in exercising absolute authority over us. But, some may say, just because he is justified in doing so, does he actually carry through with it to the violation of my will? The next verse tells us that “in him all things consist,” or, “are held together.” If all things means all things then we must conclude that not only is he just in exercising authority, and not only does he follow through in enacting his authority, but without it everything would cease to exist– even your will.

Rather than trying to figure out how free or bound our wills are maybe we should just tremble in the knowledge of how fragile we are and rejoice in the sustaining sovereignty and omnipotence of God!

The simplicity of the Gospel

If you are reading this you are most likely familiar with the line, "I love to tell the story, for those who know it best seem hungering and thirsting to hear it like the rest." I never got that as a kid. But now that I find myself falling into the Galatia trap of thinking that my salvation begun in grace through faith is now made better by finite me. What kind of spell comes over us to have such thoughts? I hunger for a steady diet of the simple Gospel that reminds me that grace does not require a suit and tie. It does not require ourtward forms of piety. It does not require "churchianity" - that confusing language only other evangelicals understand. The Gospel was never intended to morph into a culture cold to outsiders. It was intended to soften hearts to the point of loving others cross-culturally. The Gospel abhores my tendency to pretend that I'm OK when we all know that I am a sinner. The simple Gospel is the easy yoke and light burden of Jesus' teaching that defines sin not through the culture of established religion, but through Scripture alone. I love to tell that story. I need to hear that story. The Church is to be the medium of that story. Our lives are to be the testimony of that story.

The role of the pastor

With the role of the pastor varying so much from church to church it is important to continually rediscover the biblical job description. Simply put, he is to equip the saints for the work of the ministry (Eph 4:11-12). This can only be accomplished through a devotion to prayer and God's Word (2 Tim 3:16-17). There is always plenty of church work to do - good things that need to be done. The problem is that the pastor is only one man, and the important can easily trump the crucial. Acts 6 tells this story in concrete terms where the leaders, at that time Apostles, were busied with a good work to the neglect of their God-given duty. The solution was to choose out a group of godly men who could carry out those important tasks and allow the Apostles to devote themselves to prayer and the study and presentation of God's Word. If this focus was so important to men with the spiritual gift of apostleship, men who literally walked with Jesus, men who had heard him teach with their own ears, and with their own eyes saw him heal, raise the dead, cast out demons... how much more essential is this work for men like me?

In our culture the busy-work could look like office administration, financial planning, building programs, activities, and the like. These important things can easily crowd into the pastor's God given task of ministering through prayer and the Word. The solution? Godly men (deacons, elders, trustees, etc.) from within the congregation coming along side and shouldering the load.

The pastor's duty as overseer is often misunderstood, making him a CEO style administrator of the church's material assets. But, the term is used in Scripture in an exclusively spiritual sense (Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:2, Titus 1:7). The pastor's oversight is the spiritual direction he gives to the church through his teaching and leading. The pastor's task then is, by biblical definition, spiritual. This is not to say that the pastor does not pick up a hammer, or push a mower, or feed the poor, or lead a committee, or stay up all night with the teens on occasion. What it does mean is that the ministry filling the pastor's calendar must be those things declared by Scripture as non-negotiable - equping his flock through prayer and the Word of God.

Sure, this is rather broad and vague. But that is because Scripture is a field manual designed to be applicable to unlimited cultures and situations. Therefore, we can confidently say that with a commitment to the biblical design of first things first we can find a right way to get all the good stuff done too.