Anyways I too get sick of this backwards view on music, but I’m at the point where I see the church is wrong on it’s stance on music in all facets.

First CCM - CCM is a joke now, and completly going away from what it started as. What most people don’t know is that most of the labels were swallowed by the big secular labels to start making money off of what they were doing. CCM now is a business made to appeal to those it wants to reach to sell records. That means if Praise and Worship is in the fad then these labels will order their “stars” to fit music to the masses to sell a quota.

And believe me I’m not lumping them all in this category but when everyone who used to put true worship songs on their albums, start making full Worship albums you got to wonder. For example Michael W Smith’s “Great is the Lord” came out on one of his first solo albums. So why did he find it appropriate to write songs like that back then, not make a album around the concept and now all of a sudden has to have a worship album?

Again it’s not everyone, but you can tell business and money has taken over.

And this is what Steve Camp was talking about. He saw the demise of what started as something good. Oh and for those that codemn rock music - Guess what group he sang for early on in his career? That’s right - Whiteheart. A rock group. Same for Bob Carlisle (Butterfly Kisses) - sang with Allies early on, another rock group.
=================
Now as for the Church - I recently left my church, I went to my entire life, because I was tired of the inner politics. I was involved in woship and led a service myself. I have been searching for a new church but the one thing I keep find is the same fake music everywhere. I see men and women with great passion who are being led by leaders who don’t even understand what music truly means.

Let’s throw out style, style is irrelevant. God doesn’t care about style, he cares about heart and your motives. If I sit here and sing a little tune I make up about God and how much I love him, it’s worship. If I pick up a guitar and turn the distortion all the way and sing how much I can’t stand the world and it’s trouble and I want God’s help, it’s worship. And if I pick up a accoustic guitar and tell God I’m struggling because my son died it’s worship. Style means nothing.

I would say the hurdle for rock with older people is the distortion. Most older people were raised with music that was based on melody. Distortion is dissonance which is not pleasant to most people’s ears. But does that mean because rock is not pleasant to your ears we should throw it away? How about we do some digging through some history books and look at the history of music as a whole. Every form of music has had it’s good and bad points. I should know I studied music in college.

Let’s go into church music in particular - At one time melody was wrong in the eyes of God according to the church. Look at Gregorian Chant and how long it took for melody to be introduced. Looking over the history of music in church all new styles have been condemned and thrown out at first. And yes Wesley and those traditional hymns we sing today were considered wrong and by most accounts came from bar tunes.

I went to a seminar on church music, where the speaker read letters to us about complaints to the church about music. They read similar to what I read here today. Guess when they written? In the 1800s!

So throwing out style, then what is the problem? To me the real problem is we have church praise teams going through motions. We have organists doing the same thing over and over again every Sunday. I found through a lot of hard times that God doesn’t want us to sit still and stagnate and the problem I see, with both new and old music is exactly that. We have churches using the same old same old to not offend and then we have the new music done by people thinking it will win souls. And in the end it all stagnates and loses meaning.

What I see missing from music today is true passion. I don’t honestly believed Wesley intended these songs to be forever sung and nothing done new? Does it make sense? Then if this were true then the writers of these now traditional hymns were wrong to write them because they were taking away from older traditions.

I feel if you are called to do something then you should do the best job you can. If you are called to be a musician and lead worship, then do the best job you can. Whether that means writing new material in any style or singing a Gregorian chant. You have to also take into account who you are trying to reach. Sorry to those that think it but trying to get someone to like something that doesn’t sound pleasant to their ears is impossible. Much like trying to get the writer of this article to like rock in church and as trying to get a youth to enjoy a traditional hymn. There are exceptions to the rule but on average it’s not going to happen.
====================
I think Tourniquet said it best -

Besprinkled In Scarlet Horror lyrics

Words verbose, gory to what end do they serve?
Or images vivid scarlet horrors absurd
Of shrieking sounds that evoke the legions of hell
The notes that you choose and the beats that you sell

You’re not giving all the glory to Him
Because your artwork depicts a severed limb
And all the people buy into your deceit
Because you’re keeping way too frantic a beat
They said to Bach three hundred years ago
“You work in the church there’s something you should know”

“We hired you to write music that glorifies
But these toccatas and fugues just simply horrify”
He said, “they’re simply notes put together in bars
And why you think that’s wrong I just throw up my arms”

Eviscerate words that evoke emetic thoughts
Dissect and discard what speaks of corpses in rot
The leprous stumps of the sick and the lame
The stoning of Stephen, Job’s scab covered frame
And John the Baptist - a head on a pletter
Remove this gorefest - why should it matter?

You say this pace beckons evil spirits
But I care not what you call it
To me it’s two hundred beats per minute
On tablature I scrawled it

If you arrived at the site
Of Calvary’s scarlet fright
Would fears have made your feet take flight
And turn away from our Lord’s plight

On your last point, I too agree with MinTheGap that people want something different from Christianity - but that something different must also be something of substance. There are a lot of things in our churches that are just cultural (robed choirs, 17th century sea shanties with Christian lyrics, sung psalms, etc…)

But the difference in Christianity is Christ, and the difference in Christians should be the love of God, which is expressed in a true peace and joy, as well as a desire to share this joy with others.

John Piper’s book: “desiring God” speaks of conversion as the creation of a Christian hedonist. The term, of course, is meant to shock. He does not mean Christians should be hedonists as we normally understand the term, but rather that the Christian life is characterised by the love, glory and *enjoyment* of God.

When people see this they know there is something different. When people see sham Christianity, with people pretending to joy, whilst having none of it they turn away. When people see miserable Christianity, they want none of it.

Thus, to me, music in Church is something of a side issue. If we seek to create an atmosphere of celebration through popular music in Church, then we risk attempting to generate an atmosphere that is not mirrored in the lives of those present. This is sham Christianity and should be avoided. And I think there is a lot of it about.

But that does not mean we cannot have popular music. What I describe is no worse than a dour congregation miserably chanting their way through the aptly named Te Deum. Maybe the miserable crowd are a little more honest, but no more attractive.

But when Christianity is fully Christ centred, and marked by that peace of Christ and joy in him, and delight at all he has done for us - then I don’t really think it matters what style we sing - but we sing because we love Him.

I’m not trying to say we should change Black Sabbath lyrics and sing them about God in church

Why not? I think that the reason is obvious, because even the sound is linked to the band, not just the words.

You cannot separate the style and sound from the message, nor can you have conflicting messages. If, as the rock musicians say, rock music appeals to the sensual side of a person, then is it the right music to be worshipping God?

Let me take it a step further… What is the purpose of music in the church? Is the purpose to “sing things I like” or “to get people to come” (i.e. for entertainment) or is it “to extol praise on an eternal being.” If it’s either of the first two, then go ahead and sing “what people like” and what appeals to them regardless of where it comes from. If it’s the later, then you have to start to think about how music that focuses on God has to be separate, set apart. You have to start thinking about what He wants more than what I want. You have to cease to think of music as a source of entertainment, and start to think of it as a way to praise Him.

Now, I say all that but with this caveat. Associations change over time. Things that may be wrong to sing now can be fine to sing 20 years from now because of association.

And I also say that music in the church is a whole different animal. Music at your house is between you and God. Music in a church is between you, God and that guy Billy over there that believes that God freed him from a life of sin: which to him includes drugs, alcohol and rock music. If you sing that rock song with different lyrics or sing it with that beat, you’re going to wound that weak brother or send him to another church just because you decided that your preference was more important than singing songs which everyone can agree give worship to God.

And lastly, statistics have shown that when people want to come to church– are truly seeking Christ– they tend to look for something different rather than something that is the same. Christianity is marked by being different– because we are different beings. If we look the same, dress the same, and sound the same as the world, what do we really have to offer them?

It was Paul who said he became a slave to win as many as possible, and he bacame a Jew to the Jews, one under law to win those under law, and as one not having the law that he may win those not under law. He became weak to the weak, and said “I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.”

1 Corinthians 9:19-23

And in the manner of Paul (who asked us to be a follower of him, just as he was a follower of Christ), I suggest that our evangelism and outreach really does need to become all things to all men. And if that means that we don’t sing at all in our outreach, then sobeit. If that means that we use multimedia presentations, drama, or some other contemporary method to preach the gospel, then let us do so to the best of our ability, that in doing so we may save some.

There is a caveat though: Too often we confuse evangelism with worship. Perhaps we do this so we don’t notice we are not doing the evangelism! But anything I have written here applies to how we carry out evangelism - be that in the Church building or outside of it. It says nothing about how we choose to worship God as Christian community.

I agree that we need to love people where they’re at, many times we don’t need to and shouldn’t push our convictions about things like music on them but let the Spirit of God do the convicting. May He convict me if I’m wrong or being narrow-minded.

As a woman, thankfully, it’s not upon me to make a stink about whether or not our church goes one way or the other, or blurs the line. I can pray, teach my children and follow my convictions. Men, imho, have greater responsibility as far as church decisions and the like. And as a a result of men taking a back seat in today’s culture (partly thanks to feminism) I think many decisions regarding music have been made as a response to the younger generation of each decade.

So we the church follow the trends of the world. Some see it as a good thing, some don’t.

Willow Creek Community Church talk about creating a church for the unchurched. The idea is that we need to reach people where they are at, in the culture they are in - we should not be imposing our culture on them.

To some extent, modern praise-worship is just another Christian culture that we are so familiar with, that we do not even realise how alien it is to the unchurched (be they teenagers or middle aged).

In our evangelism, are we becoming all things to all men? Or are we asking all men to become like us?