Replies

Consider the latest hit from Mariah Carey. Compare it to Bach's Sheep May Safely Graze. Is it simply a matter of subjective opinion to say that, in the area of beauty, the latter far exceeds the former? Is it a matter of mere taste that Jesus Christ is Risen Today exceeds Celebrate, Jesus Celebrate in joyful, deliberate majesty? I enjoy Tito Puente, and Jobim, but would never use music from that genre to worship God publically.

I can think of two possible responses you might have. One, you might say that this is all just a matter of taste, that what's beautiful and majestic to me (and we agreed God had a right to be worshipped on his terms, and He is both beautiful and majestic) may not be so to you. You might say that this is a matter of taste and that there is no objective beauty, objective majesty, objective reverence. At this point all future discussion is pointless, since the Word of God itself could be subjected to the same standard, and my "tastes" may lead me to the Koran instead. At that point we've slidden into the sticky mire that is postmodernism, the same spirit that prompted Pontius Pilate to ask "What is truth?", and has made a mantra out of the saying "That may be true for you but is not true for me."

However, this doesn't sound like you, since you've asked for Scriptures. Leviticus is replete with verses about worship, and about the ceremonial law (which pointed to Christ), which should tell us something of the character of God, that He is concerned with worship. The entire book of Psalms is a book of worship, and some churches today use only the psalms in worship. Psalm 150 is a beautiful represention of the believer committing his whole life to the worship and glory of God, expressed in musical terms. It says, let the believer use all these instruments to praise God. In the NT, we have this: "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." Col. 3:16.

Lastly, the best Scriptural support I can offer is this: the Bible tells us about the character of God, from cover to cover. From this, we can determine what music is appropriate and what is not. Is the music majestic? Does it befit a king? Does it comport with God's holiness in its reverence? The music needn't come from any particular cultural background, but should reflect God's character.

I identify with your feelings on this issue because I was there once (see post 173, intended for you but erroneously addressed to me).

might say that this is a matter of taste and that there is no objective beauty, objective majesty, objective reverence. At this point all future discussion is pointless, since the Word of God itself could be subjected to the same standard, and my "tastes" may lead me to the Koran instead. At that point we've slidden into the sticky mire that is postmodernism, the same spirit that prompted Pontius Pilate to ask "What is truth?", and has made a mantra out of the saying "That may be true for you but is not true for me."

Amen. For anyone who believes that what we "call" worship is simply a matter of taste, read the account of the golden calf:

"And he received the gold from their hand, and he fashioned it with an engraving tool, and made a molded calf. Then they said, This is your god [Elohim], O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!' So when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, 'Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord. [YHVH - the Holy Name of God].'" Exodus 32:4-5

The children of Israel claimed to be "worhipping" the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - and even referred to Him by His most Holy Names - yet they were idolatrous.

We are not free to "worship" Him according to our tastes. I would argue further however, that the "experiences" of Sunday morning have little or nothing to do with "worship". When one considers the Biblical view of worhip being what one does with the commands of God ALL DAY, EVERY DAY - "Sunday morning experiences" are insignificant.

Our Pastor, two Sundays ago preached from Warren's book, "The Purpose Driven Life" (funny, sermons used to use the Bible as their source). He used the phrase, "When we come in here, we should do this or that..." dozens of times regarding the "worship" and coming into the "worship center" as if worship was something that we did in one place, and at one time, each week.. This was the VERY issue that the Samaratan woman brought up with Jesus. She was concerned with form and function - and PLACE. Jesus first pointed out that the Samaratans were WRONG and that Jerusalem (and the Jews) had it right - the Temple belonged in Jerusalem, not on Mt. Gerezim as the Samaratans believed. And then Jesus went on to show that worship is about "Spirit and Truth". Truth by every Biblical definition is ABSOLUTE. It is not about PLACE, or method - worship is about living LIVES that are reflections of the One Who has called us.

"... for the Father is seeking such to worship Him." John 4:23b

I respect your opinion on the matter, and feel that further debate between us on it would be counterproductive. The only quibble I would feel compeled to not leave unspoken is that I do not think that if one says that the type of music one uses (which is not claimed to be specificly deliniated by God) is subjective then it naturally and logically follows that the Bible may be taken subjectivly to since it DOES claim to be a direct revelation from God.

Also, if one bases one conception of proper worship music on the Old Testament, then does it not follow that one should base ones conception of the proper place of worship on the Old estament as wel? Should not all our places of worship be patterened on the Tabernacle whose arcitecture comes directly from God?

Bit rethorical that, I don't mean it to sound like a challange. I believe we are at an impass on the matter.

Brothers, all the same. :D