Go Back   Christian Guitar Forum > Musicians > Worship Leading
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 09-20-2004, 07:59 PM   #16
Moderator
 
Sean's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 23,760
Send a message via AIM to Sean Send a message via MSN to Sean
Quote:
Originally Posted by niangelo
This thread is laughably nitpicky.
Laughable?

1. I think some of the "theological problems' listed are absurd and thus not theological problems.

2. However, we are suppose to be nitpicky with our worship. Turning a blind eye to theological problems in worship songs isn't worshiping in "spirit and TRUTH." I would actually call it sinful to laugh at seeking truth in worship because its clearly not an attitude that lines up with scripture.

__________________
FIND ME ONLINE

Modern Ministry Blog | My thoughts on life and faith
The Sean Chandler Blog | My thoughts on culture and politics
YouTube | My thoughts on movies and TV
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Unread 09-21-2004, 08:39 AM   #17
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
Laughable?

1. I think some of the "theological problems' listed are absurd and thus not theological problems.

2. However, we are suppose to be nitpicky with our worship. Turning a blind eye to theological problems in worship songs isn't worshiping in "spirit and TRUTH." I would actually call it sinful to laugh at seeking truth in worship because its clearly not an attitude that lines up with scripture.
You mean your perception of a problem, right?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 08:48 AM   #18
Moderator
 
Sean's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 23,760
Send a message via AIM to Sean Send a message via MSN to Sean
Quote:
Originally Posted by niangelo
You mean your perception of a problem, right?
No, I mean anyones perception of a problem. If I have a theological problem with a song, it would be wrong for me to ignore it. If someone else sees a theological problem that I dont' see, my response shouldn't be to laugh at them and call them nitpicky. They might be wrong, but laughing shouldn't be ones response. And I don't really see being nitpicky as being that big of a deal.

I also think its completely un-Christ like for YOU to laugh at someone for seeking truth in worship. While we may be pointing out our perceptions of problems, you, apperently, are laughing at us for not having YOUR perception of problems.
__________________
FIND ME ONLINE

Modern Ministry Blog | My thoughts on life and faith
The Sean Chandler Blog | My thoughts on culture and politics
YouTube | My thoughts on movies and TV
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 08:57 AM   #19
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
No, I mean anyones perception of a problem. If I have a theological problem with a song, it would be wrong for me to ignore it. If someone else sees a theological problem that I dont' see, my response shouldn't be to laugh at them and call them nitpicky. They might be wrong, but laughing shouldn't be ones response. And I don't really see being nitpicky as being that big of a deal.

I also think its completely un-Christ like for YOU to laugh at someone for seeking truth in worship. While we may be pointing out our perceptions of problems, you, apperently, are laughing at us for not having YOUR perception of problems.
Well I do. A critical attitude is one of the biggest dividers in churches and damaging to the body of Christ.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 09:38 AM   #20
Moderator
 
Sean's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 23,760
Send a message via AIM to Sean Send a message via MSN to Sean
Quote:
Originally Posted by niangelo
Well I do. A critical attitude is one of the biggest dividers in churches and damaging to the body of Christ.
...and I could give you a list of verses that tell clearly show that sound doctrine is important. Further, the idea that we should worship in "spirit and truth" makes it plainly clear that we absolutely DO need to be critical of what we call worship.

Is being critical divisive? OF COURSE IT IS. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing. That darned overly critical Augustinian monk Martin Luther sure did divide the church with his critical mind and nitpicky nature. Was that a bad thing? Since you aren't Roman Catholic you must not be too CRITICAL of his CRITICAL attitude. Is "in all I do I honor" you as bad as selling indulgences...well of course not. But scripture doesn't tell us to have mostly sound doctrine, it doesn't say to worship in "spirit and mostly truth." So why would being critical be a bad thing.

BTW while we're talking about what divides the church, I'm fairly positive that a great way to divide the church is to "laugh" at those who have different convictions that yourself. The act of laughing in and of itself is divisive...of course, for you to be able to "laugh" at our different convictions you first must be CRITICAL of our conviction about being critical. So essentially, you're CRITICAL of other believer convictions and we're critical of worship (which would fall in line with worshiping in "spirit and truth").
__________________
FIND ME ONLINE

Modern Ministry Blog | My thoughts on life and faith
The Sean Chandler Blog | My thoughts on culture and politics
YouTube | My thoughts on movies and TV
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:18 AM   #21
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
...and I could give you a list of verses that tell clearly show that sound doctrine is important. Further, the idea that we should worship in "spirit and truth" makes it plainly clear that we absolutely DO need to be critical of what we call worship.

Is being critical divisive? OF COURSE IT IS. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing. That darned overly critical Augustinian monk Martin Luther sure did divide the church with his critical mind and nitpicky nature. Was that a bad thing? Since you aren't Roman Catholic you must not be too CRITICAL of his CRITICAL attitude. Is "in all I do I honor" you as bad as selling indulgences...well of course not. But scripture doesn't tell us to have mostly sound doctrine, it doesn't say to worship in "spirit and mostly truth." So why would being critical be a bad thing.

BTW while we're talking about what divides the church, I'm fairly positive that a great way to divide the church is to "laugh" at those who have different convictions that yourself. The act of laughing in and of itself is divisive...of course, for you to be able to "laugh" at our different convictions you first must be CRITICAL of our conviction about being critical. So essentially, you're CRITICAL of other believer convictions and we're critical of worship (which would fall in line with worshiping in "spirit and truth").
But these are pet doctrines Sean! No one is challenging the deity or sonship of Christ, or grace doctrine, or justification. It's just little, tiny, nitpicky things that in the scheme of all time and the universe are more hindering to our worship of God than beneficial to anyone to argue over!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:21 AM   #22
Moderator
 
Sean's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 23,760
Send a message via AIM to Sean Send a message via MSN to Sean
Quote:
Originally Posted by niangelo
But these are pet doctrines Sean! No one is challenging the deity or sonship of Christ, or grace doctrine, or justification. It's just little, tiny, nitpicky things that in the scheme of all time and the universe are more hindering to our worship of God than beneficial to anyone to argue over!
But they are worth noting and adjusting. I have no problem with my churching doing "Above All." However, I'm very greatful they change the last line of the chorus to "Lord of all" instead of "above all." One is theologically sound and the other is greatly flawed. What is the problem with being critical, identifiying a problem and fixing it? Is it such a big deal that the power point guy changes a few slides? ...of course not. So I'm having a hard time seeing why this is laughable.
__________________
FIND ME ONLINE

Modern Ministry Blog | My thoughts on life and faith
The Sean Chandler Blog | My thoughts on culture and politics
YouTube | My thoughts on movies and TV
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:29 AM   #23
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
But they are worth noting and adjusting. I have no problem with my churching doing "Above All." However, I'm very greatful they change the last line of the chorus to "Lord of all" instead of "above all." One is theologically sound and the other is greatly flawed. What is the problem with being critical, identifiying a problem and fixing it? Is it such a big deal that the power point guy changes a few slides? ...of course not. So I'm having a hard time seeing why this is laughable.
Because it never stops. The critical nature of people takes over, and time and time again people go overboard with it. Don't get me wrong, I've identified and eliminated worship songs that I felt I could not lead in good conscience. But consistent minute, miniscule things, and I'm going to go ahead a call some of the suggestions made in these posts just that, are more harmful than good. Whenever Paul wrote for clear correction and teaching it was over a serious or glaring error... apostasy, gnosticism, circumcision, things that were seriously dangerous and challenging to the truth of Christ. Almost nothing in these songs that we could pick out comes even close to that, it boils down to questionable analogys (dancers who dance upon injustice) or some other "preference".
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:31 AM   #24
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Ok, so honestly "laughable" was possibly too strong, and also disrespectful.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:42 AM   #25
Moderator
 
Sean's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 23,760
Send a message via AIM to Sean Send a message via MSN to Sean
Quote:
Originally Posted by niangelo
Because it never stops. The critical nature of people takes over, and time and time again people go overboard with it. Don't get me wrong, I've identified and eliminated worship songs that I felt I could not lead in good conscience. But consistent minute, miniscule things, and I'm going to go ahead a call some of the suggestions made in these posts just that, are more harmful than good. Whenever Paul wrote for clear correction and teaching it was over a serious or glaring error... apostasy, gnosticism, circumcision, things that were seriously dangerous and challenging to the truth of Christ. Almost nothing in these songs that we could pick out comes even close to that, it boils down to questionable analogys (dancers who dance upon injustice) or some other "preference".
I don't disagree. At time myself and others have been overly critical of some songs because a single line was rather bizzare ("dancer who dance upon injustice"), but I also firmly believe that the line in "Above All" IS a serious glarring error. Since its just a line in a song it doesn't really carry in obvious consequences, but the implications of the line are a man-centered gospel. God thought of ME above all (including Himself). Subtle lines like that ARE dangerous to sing repeatedly because they distort our perception of God. That is something worth addressing. "Dancer who dance upon injustice' is just a silly line. Its fun to be had, but not really a battle to be had.
__________________
FIND ME ONLINE

Modern Ministry Blog | My thoughts on life and faith
The Sean Chandler Blog | My thoughts on culture and politics
YouTube | My thoughts on movies and TV
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:53 AM   #26
.
 
elijah77jc's Avatar
 

Joined: May 2002
Location: Abilene, Texas
Posts: 2,734
Send a message via AIM to elijah77jc Send a message via MSN to elijah77jc Send a message via Yahoo to elijah77jc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
But they are worth noting and adjusting. I have no problem with my churching doing "Above All." However, I'm very greatful they change the last line of the chorus to "Lord of all" instead of "above all." One is theologically sound and the other is greatly flawed. What is the problem with being critical, identifiying a problem and fixing it? Is it such a big deal that the power point guy changes a few slides? ...of course not. So I'm having a hard time seeing why this is laughable.

sorry to interrupt, but why is this?
__________________
Read my blog!
elijah77jc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 10:56 AM   #27
Eaten by a grue
 
niangelo's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2001
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
I don't disagree. At time myself and others have been overly critical of some songs because a single line was rather bizzare ("dancer who dance upon injustice"), but I also firmly believe that the line in "Above All" IS a serious glarring error. Since its just a line in a song it doesn't really carry in obvious consequences, but the implications of the line are a man-centered gospel. God thought of ME above all (including Himself). Subtle lines like that ARE dangerous to sing repeatedly because they distort our perception of God. That is something worth addressing. "Dancer who dance upon injustice' is just a silly line. Its fun to be had, but not really a battle to be had.
Fair enough, that's a good point. But I would just as soon quit playing the song than change the entire catchphrase of the song.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent
That's why Jesus would use a 5-10 watt tube combo. Then Jesus can get that nice breakup He likes at a manageable volume. A volume that is somewhat formal but still says I'm here to party. Much like tuxedo t-shirt Jesus.
"If all experienced God in the same way and returned Him an identical worship, the song of the Church triumphant would have no symphony, it would be like an orchestra in which all the instruments played the same note." - C.S. Lewis
niangelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 11:25 AM   #28
Policy Terrorist
 

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,229
Send a message via MSN to agrimes87
"I Can Only Imagine" poses problems for me. Using a song that says "I wonder what heaven will be like", or even "God, what will heaven be like?" or "what will I do in heaven?" ...just seems out of place and (no offence), irrelevant in a setting where the rest of the songs are saying (or, IMO, should be saying) "God, I love you", or "thank you Jesus", or "I want more of you", etc.

I've always seen worship songs as having a sort of purpose. I choose songs for my set that are relevant to what I feel God is doing in our church, or that are relevant to what myself and our Pastor feel God wants to do in that particular meeting.
If we're planning a service that's based around Easter, and the 'theme' of the service is planned to be "the cross"...I pick out songs like "The Wonderful Cross", "Here I Am" (Paul Oakley), and "I will never be the same". Songs that are relevant to the cross and salvation. I wouldn't pick out songs with themes like "prayer", "healing", or even songs that are of praise to God the Father (since the theme is based around the sacrifice of God the Son). Relevence is very important in picking a worship set.

With that said, I've never found a place for "I Can Only Imagine". The song seems to say, as I said above, "I wonder what heaven will be like", or "God, what will heaven be like?" or "what will I do in heaven?". The only relevent situation I've found for that song is in singing a special, or perhaps as the last song before the Pastor gives a message about heaven.

Does anyone else view it this way? Does anyone else have problems with its relevence in congregational worship?
agrimes87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 11:39 AM   #29
Laconic Geezer Veep
 
Tony's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 8,299
paid
Quote:
Relevence is very important in picking a worship set.
I think I agree with this, though believe it to be a relatively new trend in worship planning, at least in the way we're discussing it.

There are more liturgical traditions that would say it's more important for the pieces of a worship service be true and excellent than thematically connected, which would make it even more important to scrutinize the song texts.

While we may not land on the same side on each questionable song, I generally appreciate this type of discussion, as it helps to make us all more deliberate, thoughtful worship planners.
__________________
tony hartsfield
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

CGR journal :: Twitter :: LinkedIn :: Facebook :: Google Profile :: Wordpress
Tony is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-21-2004, 11:50 AM   #30
Hula your way out of it
 
Kato's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2004
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,423
Send a message via AIM to Kato Send a message via MSN to Kato
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate
The most musical (and grammatically correct) solution that I have found to the last line of You Are My King is to add a little pick-up note to the last half of the phrase, and sing the word "may". "In all I do, may I honor You." "may" and "I" are sung in the space that "I" would usually be sung in.

In His love,
Nate
I sing, "In all I do, let me honor you"
__________________

Kato is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:38 PM.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2