How a Worship Format is Destroying the Evangelical Church
During my lifetime, many evangelical churches in American have moved from Bible-oriented gatherings to music-dominated meetings. Interestingly, both sets of religious gatherings typically bore the title, “Worship Service.”
When the evangelical church was Bible-oriented, this “worship” paradigm was in place:
(1) Not all elements of the service were considered equally important; the exposition of Scripture was clearly the first and foremost priority. All other competitors vied for a distant second place.
(2) When the term “worship” was used, it was the equivalent of our modern casual expression, “doing church.” It is important to note that the preaching of the Word was considered part of worship, as were announcements, testimonies, communion, prayer, singing, the offering, and special music. This was the typical structure of a “worship service” before 1980.
(3) Many evangelicals viewed music as a “warm up for the sermon.” In this regard, many leaders did not seem to often respect music ministry as actual ministry but many others did.
The change
But the paradigm has changed in many churches. The most important change was what the word “worship” communicates. The word “worship” is now used by clergy and laity alike to refer to the religious feelings aroused by music.
(1) The change in paradigms began with the addition on an article: “the” worship. As trivial as this seems, this was the beginning of emphasizing music and separating preaching and announcements from worship. We now have “the worship” and “the sermon.”
Here is just one possible scenario resulting from this change in definition. John Member has schedule a meeting with Pastor Jones. Let’s eavesdrop.
“Pastor, I think we need to cut down the time you preach. Fifteen minutes is plenty, I think.”
“I don’t agree,” replies Pastor Jones, “studying the Bible is crucial for every Christian.”
“Oh, I agree that the Bible is important, Pastor,” responds John Member, “but our morning service is billed as the morning worship service, so it should be mainly about worship, not preaching.”
In the above hypothetical conversation, you can see how the two meanings of the word “worship” are colliding with one another. In the pastor’s mind, Bible study is an important part of worship, but not in the mind of John Member. He views only music as “worship.”
(2) Other terminology changed. Schools that offered a major in church music (or “sacred music” for the hoi polloi) changed the major to “Worship Arts” (about the same time shades and curtains became “window treatments”). The song leader became known as the “worship leader.”
(3) Music became more emotionally intense, and a confusion between the emotional and the spiritual helped set music on an untouchable pedestal. Worship had become something one felt, not something one did. Worship was judged as good or bad based upon how it made worshippers feel. The Scriptures no longer defined good worship; the individual had become the discerner of truth based upon how he felt.
(4) In mega-churches, elitism and an attitude oriented toward musicians performing to the standards of other musicians (rather than aiming to bless the congregation) seems to be the norm. In some cases, musicians have become a special religious caste (like a priest, they lead the sacrifice of praise into the holy place).
(5) Even though Colossians 3:16 implies we should aim our hymns and songs both vertically and horizontally (we sing to one another and in our hearts to the Lord), the entire concept of worshiping God in the third person is gone, despite the fact that many Psalms speak of God as “He” rather than “You.”
(6) The goal of worship is creating a religious atmosphere and its attendant feelings. Often times worship leaders are weak in biblical and theological matters, but because more Christians value “worship” above theology, some of these leaders are carving out a pattern for church with little regard for biblical teaching about what the church is supposed to do when gathered.
(7) Here is the pattern: eventually worship (music and that religious feeling) is considered almost on a par with Scripture, then equal to Scripture, and eventually superior to it.* The Scriptures become subservient to the music and are used more as transitions between songs than holy word to be expounded. Biblical sermons have given way to self-help lectures or emotionally charged sermons with lots of illustrations—replacing the previous Psalm 1 mentality. The idea of worshiping God through deep Bible study and meditation in the Word is unknown; worship now means music and feelings.
The consequences & dangers of the new “worship format”
- Religion is back in vogue. We used to hear “I’m not religious, I just love the Lord,” or “Christianity is not a religion; it is a relationship.” Because of the new emphasis on religious feeling, it is fair to say that we have moved back into the domain of religion.
- Worship has become a religious experience dependent upon something else than the gathering of Christians to study the Word, pray, celebrate communion, and sing a few hymns. Based upon modern viewpoints, the early church must have done a poor job of worshipping God.
- If the church is about worship, and if worship is a religious feeling induced from a church gathering, then, if I get a stronger version of that feeling somewhere else, that is where I need to be. Rather than the Bible, a passionate feeling of worship becomes the canon by which I measure truth.
As a result, Christians not only move from evangelical church to evangelical church, but they also desert evangelicalism. Our heritage is based upon the centrality of Scripture; we are really novices at the religion game. But even if we competed well on a religious level, are we right to trash the primacy of Scripture? What about the convictions of the Reformation?
The problem is not contemporary music, seeking to have meaningful worship through songs of praise, etc. The problem is displacement. When we displace the knowledge of the Word and solid doctrine with music (whether we call music worship or not), we are no longer under the lordship of Christ. The Christian life includes public worship, but the highest form of worship is hearing and doing the Word of God. That is why the ultimate “worship book” in the Bible, the book of Psalms, begins with emphasizing constant meditation on the Word. The longest Psalm (119) makes the point even more emphatically. God seeks those who worship Him in Spirit and in truth. It is hard to worship God in truth if you don’t know the truth and if you do not make the truth a priority.
Ed Vasicek Bio
Ed Vasicek was raised as a Roman Catholic but, during high school, Cicero (IL) Bible Church reached out to him, and he received Jesus Christ as his Savior by faith alone. Ed earned his BA at Moody Bible Institute and served as pastor for many years at Highland Park Church, where he is now pastor emeritus. Ed and his wife, Marylu, have two adult children. Ed has published over 1,000 columns for the opinion page of the Kokomo Tribune, published articles in Pulpit Helps magazine, and posted many papers which are available at edvasicek.com. Ed has also published the The Midrash Key and The Amazing Doctrines of Paul As Midrash: The Jewish Roots and Old Testament Sources for Paul's Teachings.
- 327 views
Steve Wrote:
As far as “other times,” perhaps you are unconvinced that for many Christians — I would say the majority — there are no “other times.” So do we construct our one church opportunity based upon the way Christians used to be or the way they are?
However, I’m not sure how much “one another” gets done in church services or needs to get done at that time although people will be encouraged by testimonies, etc. I think the “one another” takes place more elsewhere and in smaller group settings after the “ONE OTHER” has been worshiped.When we sing, we sing in our hearts to the Lord but also to one another (Colossians 3:16-17). It is never to just the Lord in church. Otherwise, why gather together? And note the priority of teaching even in singing.
As far as “other times,” perhaps you are unconvinced that for many Christians — I would say the majority — there are no “other times.” So do we construct our one church opportunity based upon the way Christians used to be or the way they are?
"The Midrash Detective"
[KevinM] And while I agree that Acts 2, 4, Eph. 5 and Col 3 have much to say about our church meetings…none of them speak of “corporate worship.” That’s a baggage-laden phrase that isn’t helping us get to the basic question of what the church does when it gathers.Kevin,
Are you arguing against the concept of corporate worship, or just the terminology?
I have never considered the term to be baggage, but would be interested in knowing why it might be.
I would think we could support the term on the basis of passages such as 1 Cor. 11:17 and 1 Cor. 14:40, if nothing else. The detailed instructions of 1 Cor. 11-14 as a whole would also seem to apply directly to corporate worship.
Further, I have always believed that since the largest book in the Bible — Psalms — is almost entirely devoted to worship (much of it corporate), and since we might call much of that book “trans-dispensational,” as Aaron said, most of what needed to be said about worship can simply be inferred from the records in Acts of the earlist Christians — who began by meeting in the Temple.
I am not convinced that their earliest gatherings would have borne much resemblance to an ol’-fashioned tent revival. 8-) Probably much more like a formal synagogue service.
Am I wrong? :)
Blessings, brother!
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
[Paul J. Scharf]The earliest believers were Messianic Jews and tended to meet in homes or alongside waterfronts. They usually ate meals together and spent lots of time together. They probably did recite Jewish prayers (not the article before “prayers” in Acts 2:42), but the I Cor. 12-14 section suggests a lot of spontaneous sharing with most people contributing something. They probably had communion each time they met, and, since people had to travel by foot, when they met they met for a LONG TIME. I Corinthians 14:26 makes the point:[KevinM] And while I agree that Acts 2, 4, Eph. 5 and Col 3 have much to say about our church meetings…none of them speak of “corporate worship.” That’s a baggage-laden phrase that isn’t helping us get to the basic question of what the church does when it gathers.Kevin,
Are you arguing against the concept of corporate worship, or just the terminology?
I have never considered the term to be baggage, but would be interested in knowing why it might be.
I would think we could support the term on the basis of passages such as 1 Cor. 11:17 and 1 Cor. 14:40, if nothing else. The detailed instructions of 1 Cor. 11-14 as a whole would also seem to apply directly to corporate worship.
Further, I have always believed that since the largest book in the Bible — Psalms — is almost entirely devoted to worship (much of it corporate), and since we might call much of that book “trans-dispensational,” as Aaron said, most of what needed to be said about worship can simply be inferred from the records in Acts of the earlist Christians — who began by meeting in the Temple.
I am not convinced that their earliest gatherings would have borne much resemblance to an ol’-fashioned tent revival. 8-) Probably much more like a formal synagogue service.
Am I wrong? :)
Blessings, brother!
26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.
"The Midrash Detective"
The Odes of Solomon were originally NOT ascribed to him, but were actual hymns sung by early Christians. To read them, follow this link:
http://users.misericordia.edu//davies/thomas/odes.htm http://users.misericordia.edu//davies/thomas/odes.htm
Early on, it seems that the Jewish believers started some Messianic Synagogues. Raymond Fischer (who is quite speculative and not one whose judgment I always agree with) addresses some of these things in his book, “The Ways of the Way.”
http://users.misericordia.edu//davies/thomas/odes.htm http://users.misericordia.edu//davies/thomas/odes.htm
Early on, it seems that the Jewish believers started some Messianic Synagogues. Raymond Fischer (who is quite speculative and not one whose judgment I always agree with) addresses some of these things in his book, “The Ways of the Way.”
"The Midrash Detective"
As a musician who voluntarily (I am unpaid) ministers in my local church, I have to say that I am shocked at some of the comments here. To those who believe that there is no scriptural precedent for full time musicians, I can only assume that you are ignorant of I Chronicles 9:33, which is a portion of a list of offices and duties of the Levites:
It is my greatest joy to assist in any way I can with the music in our church. I do it because I love it, but also because I was called to it when I was a teenager. There was a specific time and place that God placed a calling on my heart that involved a change of direction for my plans of study in college. When I arrived at college, I was told that God does not call people to minister in music as He does to be pastors, and that only those who could make the grade would be allowed to continue in the program. Due to a lack of training during my childhood, I was likely to be unable to make the grade. I went before the God who had called me, and asked Him to bless me with the ability to keep up so that I could fulfill His calling for me, and He miraculously gave me abilities I never practiced for. Do not be so hasty in determining who God has called to what. I believe that He can call any Christian to do any work for Him—an auto mechanic who is an honest man that serves his fellow Christians and becomes a testimony to his unsaved customers can be called to that work, and his calling is no less important, no less valid than that of a minister, pastor, teacher, evangelist, nursery worker, etc. in the church.
To those who are relieved when the music portion of their church service is over and you can settle down to the sermon, I have this to say: I attend church because I want to hear the sermon. It nourishes my spirit in a way that no other portion of the service does, and I feel a void when I (rarely) have to be out of the service during the sermon. However, my spirit is also nourished by the time that I spend in fellowship with other Christians after the service. It is the only consistent time each week that I get to spend time with other Christians aside from my husband. Likewise, my spirit is nourished—sometimes more, sometimes less—by the music during the service. I can tell when the music comes across as a performance and when it comes across as an offering to God. The later seems to wash over the congregation like a wave and they sing out because they cannot help themselves. I am not the only musician in our church. I am the main pianist, but we have several praise teams, which I do not accompany. I have seen both performances and offerings of worship to God come from both myself and from the other musicians. It takes a lot of work in my own walk with God to ensure that each time I sit at the piano I am in fact offering worship to God.
Something we do at our church that is a bit unusual is that we encourage the young pianists (we also have a flutist) to occasionally play one of the congregational hymns. My pastor feels very strongly that the local church is the place for young people to grow in their ability to use their gifts for God. To that end, we want to give the young people an opportunity to overcome the nervousness that can accompany getting up in front of people to do anything (speak, play an intrument, take an offering). We also want to train them to be able to use whatever ability they have on their instrument to use it if it should be needed. That is where I have responsibility to work with the young musicians and help them understand how to play for a congregation (find a comfortable speed for everyone, keep a steady tempo, keep going no matter what mistakes you make, know your music well enough to glance at whoever is leading the hymns.)
Incidentally, I would like to mention that it takes a tremendous amount of time to prepare for a Sunday service, to mentor the young musicians, to work with those who need an accompanist, to prepare for special services. I do not begrudge the time, but those who can’t wait for the music to be over need to give some thought to how appreciative they are of the effort that others put into the service.
And these are the singers, chief of the fathers of the Levites, who remaining in the chambers were free: for they were employed in that work day and night.In other words, they did not share in any of the other duties of the priests (such as caring for the vessels, or stores, or making the shewbread, which are other duties and offices included in the list) because they were occupied full time with the ministry of music. By the way, these were priests who led the sacrifice of praise near the holy place—not necessarily into it.
It is my greatest joy to assist in any way I can with the music in our church. I do it because I love it, but also because I was called to it when I was a teenager. There was a specific time and place that God placed a calling on my heart that involved a change of direction for my plans of study in college. When I arrived at college, I was told that God does not call people to minister in music as He does to be pastors, and that only those who could make the grade would be allowed to continue in the program. Due to a lack of training during my childhood, I was likely to be unable to make the grade. I went before the God who had called me, and asked Him to bless me with the ability to keep up so that I could fulfill His calling for me, and He miraculously gave me abilities I never practiced for. Do not be so hasty in determining who God has called to what. I believe that He can call any Christian to do any work for Him—an auto mechanic who is an honest man that serves his fellow Christians and becomes a testimony to his unsaved customers can be called to that work, and his calling is no less important, no less valid than that of a minister, pastor, teacher, evangelist, nursery worker, etc. in the church.
To those who are relieved when the music portion of their church service is over and you can settle down to the sermon, I have this to say: I attend church because I want to hear the sermon. It nourishes my spirit in a way that no other portion of the service does, and I feel a void when I (rarely) have to be out of the service during the sermon. However, my spirit is also nourished by the time that I spend in fellowship with other Christians after the service. It is the only consistent time each week that I get to spend time with other Christians aside from my husband. Likewise, my spirit is nourished—sometimes more, sometimes less—by the music during the service. I can tell when the music comes across as a performance and when it comes across as an offering to God. The later seems to wash over the congregation like a wave and they sing out because they cannot help themselves. I am not the only musician in our church. I am the main pianist, but we have several praise teams, which I do not accompany. I have seen both performances and offerings of worship to God come from both myself and from the other musicians. It takes a lot of work in my own walk with God to ensure that each time I sit at the piano I am in fact offering worship to God.
Something we do at our church that is a bit unusual is that we encourage the young pianists (we also have a flutist) to occasionally play one of the congregational hymns. My pastor feels very strongly that the local church is the place for young people to grow in their ability to use their gifts for God. To that end, we want to give the young people an opportunity to overcome the nervousness that can accompany getting up in front of people to do anything (speak, play an intrument, take an offering). We also want to train them to be able to use whatever ability they have on their instrument to use it if it should be needed. That is where I have responsibility to work with the young musicians and help them understand how to play for a congregation (find a comfortable speed for everyone, keep a steady tempo, keep going no matter what mistakes you make, know your music well enough to glance at whoever is leading the hymns.)
Incidentally, I would like to mention that it takes a tremendous amount of time to prepare for a Sunday service, to mentor the young musicians, to work with those who need an accompanist, to prepare for special services. I do not begrudge the time, but those who can’t wait for the music to be over need to give some thought to how appreciative they are of the effort that others put into the service.
Music frequently becomes an emotionally over-heated topic because music itself has a strong influence over our emotions, and as such, must be handled with great care. I will say that as I have ministered in music I have occasionally seen music reach hearts in a way that nothing else could. I have seen a man who for three years requested prayer for his own salvation come to Christ as the result of a song. I have seen hearts of stone be broken and become tender as a result of music. I have seen hurting hearts be healed as a result of music. I have seen apathetic hearts set on fire as a result of music. I do not believe that the music stands alone to bring these changes. God uses the music, and the preaching of His Word, and the words of a friend spoken in private conversation, and life circumstances, and anything else He chooses (including the glory of creation—Ps. 19:1-6; Rom. 1:19-20) to reach a heart that He seeks to draw to Himself.
As for the “worship format” destroying the church, this is really a matter of heart attitudes. For some, even many, perhaps the “new” terminology for the non-sermon part of the service has only revealed what is already in their hearts—that their relationship with God is based on their feelings, so they want to capitalize on the portion of the service that caters to those feelings. It is a shame that the sermon portion of their service does not address the right relationship with God, that it is dependent on His character, not my feelings, that everything we do is worship that is either pleasing or displeasing to God. What are you that are pastors teaching your people about worship? Are you leading them to spiritual maturity in this area? Or leaving them to flounder in their immaturity?
I will close this rather lengthy post with this point. Twice during the dedication of Solomon’s Temple the glory of the Lord filled the temple so that the priests could not carry out their duties. The first time was in response to the music, the second was in response to Solomon’s prayer. Neither was a sermon. Here is the passage concerning the music:
As for the “worship format” destroying the church, this is really a matter of heart attitudes. For some, even many, perhaps the “new” terminology for the non-sermon part of the service has only revealed what is already in their hearts—that their relationship with God is based on their feelings, so they want to capitalize on the portion of the service that caters to those feelings. It is a shame that the sermon portion of their service does not address the right relationship with God, that it is dependent on His character, not my feelings, that everything we do is worship that is either pleasing or displeasing to God. What are you that are pastors teaching your people about worship? Are you leading them to spiritual maturity in this area? Or leaving them to flounder in their immaturity?
I will close this rather lengthy post with this point. Twice during the dedication of Solomon’s Temple the glory of the Lord filled the temple so that the priests could not carry out their duties. The first time was in response to the music, the second was in response to Solomon’s prayer. Neither was a sermon. Here is the passage concerning the music:
And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place: (for all the priests that were present were sanctified, and did not then wait by course: Also the Levites which were the singers, all of them of Asaph, of Heman, of Jeduthun, with their sons and their brethren, being arrayed in white linen, having cymbals and psalteries and harps, stood at the east end of the altar, and with them an hundred and twenty priests sounding with trumpets:) It came even to pass, as the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one sound to be heard in praising and thanking the LORD; and when they lifted up their voice with the trumpets and cymbals and instruments of musick, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever: that then the house was filled with a cloud, even the house of the LORD; So that the priests could not stand to minister by reason of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD had filled the house of God.Notice the emphasis on the unity of their worship in verse 13. That unity is, IMHO, a vital part of what the music portion of a worship service can contribute to the service. Each time I sit at the piano, I hope to be used of God to move the hearts of the congregation to unity in worship, to a praise of our transcendent God, to deeper devotion to Him, and to a greater motivation to serve and please Him in every aspect of their lives.
- 2 Chronicles 5:11-14
The comments and discussion have been interesting, and honestly this is not a topic I have recently considered much and it has really got me thinking.
I think one other observation from the comments is that this appears to be a real issue/concern across churches of all stripes, fundamentalist churches included. I believe it is worthy of more discussion.
Although I guess putting the spotlight on the “evil evangelicals” makes for a catchier title :-)
I think one other observation from the comments is that this appears to be a real issue/concern across churches of all stripes, fundamentalist churches included. I believe it is worthy of more discussion.
Although I guess putting the spotlight on the “evil evangelicals” makes for a catchier title :-)
[Paul J. Scharf] Kevin, Are you arguing against the concept of corporate worship, or just the terminology?…I would think we could support the term on the basis of passages such as 1 Cor. 11:17 and 1 Cor. 14:40, if nothing else. The detailed instructions of 1 Cor. 11-14 as a whole would also seem to apply directly to corporate worship.I’m still in favor of the concept—you know that I help plan and lead the “worship service” at my own church. I’m happy to refer to it this way on the popular level, when necessary. But I think the term “corporate worship” hasn’t been especially helpful in describing what the NT teaches (and has been misused by various denominational systems). Yes, the passages you cite are among the most important to study on this subject. But your passages don’t use the term “corporate worship,” and I wouldn’t either. The passages are about…the gathered church (a broader concept than “worship” or “church music.”)
And the idea of a “gathered church” rather than “corporate worship” is a more Baptist idea.
Here’s why I’m making this distinction. I want to embrace the idea that worship is an all-of-life activity, not limited to a particular time or place, not requiring a priest or any other mediator other than Christ Himself. And I want to reject the idea that “corporate worship” is governed by a special set of rules (a Regulative Principle) that are, frankly, rooted in OT exegesis and a Presbyterian understanding of the relationship between Israel and the church.
Yes, it it possible to reject the RP and its terminology and still have orderly church meetings, which are still “regulated” by the NT passages you cited, along with many other NT passages that teach grace principles for godly living. Too many Baptists got sidetracked by the Presbyterian “Regulative Principle” discussion, thinking that we should adopt it as a way of enforcing conservative and orderly church services. I’m less convinced that adopting their idea will foster any sort of Baptist clarity on worship issues. After all, the Presbyterians spent the last 25 years arguing over just what the Regulative Principle means.
I’m still searching for ways to articulate this on a popular level. An earlier poster suggested that a lot of our terminology is laden with a thick layer of Catholic ideas, and I agree. Still thinking about this…
Thanks for the obvious reflective spirit that’s being shown here. I have been a choir director/song leader/Praise Team leader (as I said above, in many different circles). I’ve seen musical showmanship taken to ridiculous lengths, I’ve seen preaching showmanship taken to ridiculous lengths. Been pretty indepth in the church history side of music too and have seen various modern writers quote Church Fathers and Reformation leaders when they support their view and ignore others who don’t support their views, even while claiming to be writing a non-biased article or book. So if we’re willing to accept the bad from the best and the good from the not-so-good we’ll survive. We’ll just never completely agree here. I do completelely share the concern that a Jeremiah-like (15:16) hunger for the Word has suffered a deplorable decline.
I cite the “One Anothers” knowing full well many of them are practiced outside the usual Sunday morning service—at least once the service begins—but that’s another one of my problems. We don’t practice the “worship” of the “One Anothers” very well at ANY time(!), even if we have biblical and balanced “worship services”. In order to be Word-oriented AND , our church also has a scripture memory program for the adults, stress daily “devotions” (I hate that word), and have evening gatherings on Sunday that AREN’T preaching services. The “One Anothers” are so broad and deep that they bear constant repeating to our congregations who are so accustomed to “church-and-AWANA” is surely all “that the Lord doth require of me”!
So, yes, we need to think beyond the church services. We need to examine our sermons to ensure that there’s “milk” and “meat”, there’s comfort for the afflicted and affliction for the comforted—ha. We MAY even change how we do the communion service, offering, or the closing (“Invitation”) at the end of the service—so that we may see “the LORD high and lifted up” and respond by saying “Here am I, send me” or simply leave with a greater love for the Lord and for the lost in our (Location, Education, Relation, Vocation, and Recreation) “worlds”.
I cite the “One Anothers” knowing full well many of them are practiced outside the usual Sunday morning service—at least once the service begins—but that’s another one of my problems. We don’t practice the “worship” of the “One Anothers” very well at ANY time(!), even if we have biblical and balanced “worship services”. In order to be Word-oriented AND , our church also has a scripture memory program for the adults, stress daily “devotions” (I hate that word), and have evening gatherings on Sunday that AREN’T preaching services. The “One Anothers” are so broad and deep that they bear constant repeating to our congregations who are so accustomed to “church-and-AWANA” is surely all “that the Lord doth require of me”!
So, yes, we need to think beyond the church services. We need to examine our sermons to ensure that there’s “milk” and “meat”, there’s comfort for the afflicted and affliction for the comforted—ha. We MAY even change how we do the communion service, offering, or the closing (“Invitation”) at the end of the service—so that we may see “the LORD high and lifted up” and respond by saying “Here am I, send me” or simply leave with a greater love for the Lord and for the lost in our (Location, Education, Relation, Vocation, and Recreation) “worlds”.
gdwightlarson "You can be my brother without being my twin."
@ Julie- I don’t think that the operations/positions of the Levitical priesthood and the NT church are apples to apples. The gifts/callings listed in 1 Cor 12 does not include musicians… . Are those people gifted? Can they do what they do to the honor and glory of God and to benefit the brethren? Are they as valuable as others who serve in different capacities? Sure- but if we are talking about spiritual gifts for ministry, I don’t consider music to be one of them under NT guidelines.
As for enjoying preaching more than singing, that’s a personal preference, and has nothing to do with not appreciating the efforts of those who sing… especially since I have often been part of the special music portion of the service (choir, quartet, solos…).
As for enjoying preaching more than singing, that’s a personal preference, and has nothing to do with not appreciating the efforts of those who sing… especially since I have often been part of the special music portion of the service (choir, quartet, solos…).
I don’t mean to move in and steel the conversation, so feel free to keep going around this question, but I have a question from the article:
Ed said,
At the same time, we were given no sources to verify whether Ed’s statements about these “many churches” are true or not. I’m not saying he’s wrong per-se. I’m just saying that it’s a “take my word for it that I’m right” type article and it’s hard to convince people to your point of view when this is the case.
Because of these generalizations, to me, I respectfully think that the article came across as Ed taking pot shots against his pet peeve yet hitting no one in particular. For that reason (and many others), I do not believe it to be effective in changing the minds of those who may possess some of these stated negative characteristics but will only help those who agree with Ed to pat themselves on the back and feel good about the fact that they get their format of “worship” right.
Hate to be so tough, but I left the article with more questions than answers…
Ed said,
[Ed] But the paradigm has changed in many churches.I was wondering to which evangelical churches Ed is referring? I personally have never been to this generalized church that has displaced the Word for singing. I’ve been a part of churches that have one, maybe two of the said negative characteristics, but not all. If it is a “shot” at new-evangelicals, the article doesn’t say so. If this is happening to Fundamentalist evangelicals or Conservative Evangelicals, the article doesn’t say that either. Is it across the spectrum of evangelical churches? Are there specific churches in particular? I’m just confused as to the identity of these “many churches.”
At the same time, we were given no sources to verify whether Ed’s statements about these “many churches” are true or not. I’m not saying he’s wrong per-se. I’m just saying that it’s a “take my word for it that I’m right” type article and it’s hard to convince people to your point of view when this is the case.
Because of these generalizations, to me, I respectfully think that the article came across as Ed taking pot shots against his pet peeve yet hitting no one in particular. For that reason (and many others), I do not believe it to be effective in changing the minds of those who may possess some of these stated negative characteristics but will only help those who agree with Ed to pat themselves on the back and feel good about the fact that they get their format of “worship” right.
Hate to be so tough, but I left the article with more questions than answers…
When I asked an “old school” pastor friend in the 1980’s about contemporary worship (in those days, whatever Amy Grant was doing), he replied, “Music has always been ‘The War Department’ of the church.”
The positions themselves are not necessarily applicable for the NT church. We don’t have anyone at our church who oversees the shewbread, but we do have someone who is responsible for preparing the elements for communion and doing so in a responsible manner out of service to the Lord. However, lack of an NT precedent for full time musicians does not mean that there is no scriptural precedent for full time musicians. I also cannot believe that the OT descriptions of the leaders in worship are completely inapplicable to the NT church. There is a lot more information in the OT about music used to worship God that there is in the NT. I also cannot believe that the converted Jews of the early church abandoned the music they had used in worship of God in the synagogues. Aaron commented on this in http://sharperiron.org/comment/24624#comment-24624] Post #22 . The tradition of music that was begun under Moses was carried down through Israel’s history, and new music was added—especially during the lives of David and Solomon. One other thing—the titles/superscripts of the Psalms frequently include the dedication “To the Chief Musician.” This indicates that someone was responsible for managing the music in whatever way it was used in the services in the OT.
The list of gifts/callings in 1 Corinthians 12:28 includes the gift of teaching and the gift of administration. I see music ministry as falling into both of those categories. For example, one could argue that creating the nursery schedule is part of the gift of administration that is given by God for the benefit of the local church. There is a lot of administration involved in directing a music program for an entire church, and the amount of administration increases with the size of the church. As for the gift of teaching, Paul commands the Colossians to teach and admonish one another in music:
As for a personal preference for one portion of the service over another, I take no issue with that, but the reference to being “glad it’s over” to me showed a lack of appreciation for the efforts put into the music and possibly also for its usefulness. Perhaps I took the phrasing too seriously/literally.
The list of gifts/callings in 1 Corinthians 12:28 includes the gift of teaching and the gift of administration. I see music ministry as falling into both of those categories. For example, one could argue that creating the nursery schedule is part of the gift of administration that is given by God for the benefit of the local church. There is a lot of administration involved in directing a music program for an entire church, and the amount of administration increases with the size of the church. As for the gift of teaching, Paul commands the Colossians to teach and admonish one another in music:
[Colossian 3:16] 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. -It is significant that Paul does not say to teach and admonish and sing. He says to teach and admonish in the music.
As for a personal preference for one portion of the service over another, I take no issue with that, but the reference to being “glad it’s over” to me showed a lack of appreciation for the efforts put into the music and possibly also for its usefulness. Perhaps I took the phrasing too seriously/literally.
Away with the church service. In with the Assembly of the saints. Away with the Clergy leader. In with the God glorifying congregation.
The NT concept of worship appears to have originated from the gatherings of the believers subsequent to Pentecost where the greater NT assembly were all empowered with gifting and enabled for witnessing. OT worship has no transferable truth.
Our heritage of the past is of little help. The Catholics found OT transferrable truth and so have the Mass and Priesthood. The Anglicans kept this but rejected the Pope. The Lutherans modified it. The Reformed rejected much but kept the Clergy and OT concept of special presence in the ordinances along with the service of worship. Baptists kept an order of worship but rejected the special presence in the ordinances and made the service more informal. They also kept the Clergy but dumbed down the qualifications. The Plymouth Brethren made some necessary adjustments.
We need to take a fresh look at scripture.
Most Evangelical and Fundamental churches today are still in the grip of the “Clergy” concept and the “worship service” concept. They are also driven by cultural osmosis that influences practice and diminishes the Glory of God among His people.
NT worship is a full life concept according to Rom.12: 1-2. It is that which should characterize everyday life and then be expressed by the Christians in assembly. The Christian assembly worship is the believers in joint praise and submission. Worship centers on God glorified in the assembly of the saints. The focus is to be the word. God speaks in his word. We speak to God in song and spoken testimony and prayer. A God gifted teacher may bring focus on the word with explanation and life application. Instruments are perhaps optional and should only be used so long as they convey proper mood and arouse only proper emotions. Assembly singing without instruments should be considered and perhaps prominent. The interference of assembly worship by performances by individuals or groups (special music), and the noisy metal and wooden brethren of instruments, can be very distracting from the assembly concept and word focused worship experience. The singing of too many songs using the first person plural of I instead of we misses the assembly worship concept. Clergy sermons with attempted shouting, pounding, or calling attention to the Clergy deliverer may also take away from the focus on God’s word. Sermonic outlines and rhetorical concepts can also diminish the effect of God’s word. Many Fundamentalist and Evangelical churches (assemblies) have traditions and beliefs that drive practices that make their assemblies into services and their services into ineffectual gatherings for the true assembly God’s people for worship.
We must move away from being “churches” gathering for “services” to assemblies of the saints together for worship in the word of God. He has spoken in scripture. We must listen and learn and speak back with expressions of praise, prayer, and song. Away with the noise, performances, and rhetorical ruffles and flourishes. He must increase and we must decrease.
The NT concept of worship appears to have originated from the gatherings of the believers subsequent to Pentecost where the greater NT assembly were all empowered with gifting and enabled for witnessing. OT worship has no transferable truth.
Our heritage of the past is of little help. The Catholics found OT transferrable truth and so have the Mass and Priesthood. The Anglicans kept this but rejected the Pope. The Lutherans modified it. The Reformed rejected much but kept the Clergy and OT concept of special presence in the ordinances along with the service of worship. Baptists kept an order of worship but rejected the special presence in the ordinances and made the service more informal. They also kept the Clergy but dumbed down the qualifications. The Plymouth Brethren made some necessary adjustments.
We need to take a fresh look at scripture.
Most Evangelical and Fundamental churches today are still in the grip of the “Clergy” concept and the “worship service” concept. They are also driven by cultural osmosis that influences practice and diminishes the Glory of God among His people.
NT worship is a full life concept according to Rom.12: 1-2. It is that which should characterize everyday life and then be expressed by the Christians in assembly. The Christian assembly worship is the believers in joint praise and submission. Worship centers on God glorified in the assembly of the saints. The focus is to be the word. God speaks in his word. We speak to God in song and spoken testimony and prayer. A God gifted teacher may bring focus on the word with explanation and life application. Instruments are perhaps optional and should only be used so long as they convey proper mood and arouse only proper emotions. Assembly singing without instruments should be considered and perhaps prominent. The interference of assembly worship by performances by individuals or groups (special music), and the noisy metal and wooden brethren of instruments, can be very distracting from the assembly concept and word focused worship experience. The singing of too many songs using the first person plural of I instead of we misses the assembly worship concept. Clergy sermons with attempted shouting, pounding, or calling attention to the Clergy deliverer may also take away from the focus on God’s word. Sermonic outlines and rhetorical concepts can also diminish the effect of God’s word. Many Fundamentalist and Evangelical churches (assemblies) have traditions and beliefs that drive practices that make their assemblies into services and their services into ineffectual gatherings for the true assembly God’s people for worship.
We must move away from being “churches” gathering for “services” to assemblies of the saints together for worship in the word of God. He has spoken in scripture. We must listen and learn and speak back with expressions of praise, prayer, and song. Away with the noise, performances, and rhetorical ruffles and flourishes. He must increase and we must decrease.
Joseph Said:
Many churches that do not advertise themselves as seeker-sensitive have embraced this paradigm.
Then there are the emerging churches that practice the stations of the cross and other Romish traditions, and they may read Scriptures, but there is little actual digging into the text.
In my town, only a few evangelical churches have pastors who preach exposition and who challenge their people to grow in Bible knowledge and doctrine. I know of many large evangelical churches that are so dumbed down. I was talking to a pastor last year who has been ministering for 10 years and was reading the Book of Job for the first time. I cannot count how many Christians began attending churches that teach you have to be baptized to be saved or other serious errors, and when I confront them, they say, “well, we go there for the worship.”
Maybe things are different in your neck of the woods, but from what I read, the problem is widespread. Christian leaders have not read through their Bibles even once, only a small percentage can list the 10 commandments, etc. It is real bad. Even Christian bookstores which used to be filled with books are now mostly filled with music and gifts. That’s how I see it, anyway.
I was wondering to which evangelical churches Ed is referring?I am a little amazed, with all the Barna stats and Willow Creek admitting they are not teaching the word that this questions came up. I could be referring to many churches in the evangelical world, but the Seeker Sensitive types are the most obvious, esp. those that became Seeker Sensitive. I do not consider topical self-help sermons week after week that just refer to a verse here or there as teaching the word.
Many churches that do not advertise themselves as seeker-sensitive have embraced this paradigm.
Then there are the emerging churches that practice the stations of the cross and other Romish traditions, and they may read Scriptures, but there is little actual digging into the text.
In my town, only a few evangelical churches have pastors who preach exposition and who challenge their people to grow in Bible knowledge and doctrine. I know of many large evangelical churches that are so dumbed down. I was talking to a pastor last year who has been ministering for 10 years and was reading the Book of Job for the first time. I cannot count how many Christians began attending churches that teach you have to be baptized to be saved or other serious errors, and when I confront them, they say, “well, we go there for the worship.”
Maybe things are different in your neck of the woods, but from what I read, the problem is widespread. Christian leaders have not read through their Bibles even once, only a small percentage can list the 10 commandments, etc. It is real bad. Even Christian bookstores which used to be filled with books are now mostly filled with music and gifts. That’s how I see it, anyway.
"The Midrash Detective"
Discussion