Thoughts on Music not Being a Controversy When It Really is

8304 reads

There are 37 Comments

mmartin's picture

There are some one this blog and many commenting on other blogs & sites, including the “Redeemed” youtube video, who are expressing their opinions with a condescending attitude towards conservative, traditional beliefs regarding worship and music.
Bob Hayton recently said in his blog, “fundamentalists as a whole eschew a gospel-centered unity in favor of a separation-centric modus operandi” He then posed the question if it was unfair to say funfamentalism is separation-centered. This is grossly false, misleading, provacative, and intellectually lazy. That is just as wrong as it would be for me to say all of evangelicalism is completely filled with heresy because they will not separate from anything.  My post here isn't directly about Mr. Hayton's comment, just an illustration.

In my life I have seen many of my friends leave their fundamental baptist heritage and go to a evangelical church. I have often personally seen and read comments of people ridiculing fundamentalism. Quite often the transition was not done quietly in any way that could be described as graceful and with humility.
I have a family member that attends a new evangelical church. When some people in that world find out my family member transitioned from fundamentalism they sometimes as if my relative is a recovering Fundy. I respect my relative for saying that is not the case, and if the other person has an issue with fundamentalism then that is their problem.

Most often they feel fundamentalism is stuffy, stale, dead, is more interested in separation than sanctification, not “relevant,” unloving, etc, etc. and they make regular comments in a snide-kind of way. In other words, they dislike something they feel is harsh, judemental, and filled with lazy people holding onto old traditions. But, they regularly express that opinion in a harsh, judgemental ,& lazy (lumping ALL IFB into one pot) kind of way. They point their bony finger to the right side of the isle and complain about how the IFB hurts the gospel with all of their judgementalism – but they express that thought in a judgemental way.

So, tell me again why I should leave something that you say is all harsh, judgemental, and filled with lazy group-think . . . . and go to your group that is harsh, judgemental and filled with lazy group-think????

If that is the way you are and quite a bit of what I've seen from your side, then I'll just stay right where I'm at because I believe it is where the Lord would have me And your side for sure isn't giving me much to buy into anyway.

You almost never, ever see people saying they left fundamentalism for evangelicalism because they truly, honestly knew it was what the Lord wanted them to do. I'm not saying it this happen.  But I will say from my experience and observation that this is what I've seen - and that is a fair amount.

A word of wisdom to the anti-fundamentalist crowd, yes, fundamentalism has its issues, but so does the other side of the isle – a lot of issues in fact.

My point comes all down to this:  Both sides need to correctly practice the gospel they claim they preach and it might do us all a bit of good to rationally think before we speak or post something on a blog/website.

dmyers's picture

Ryan Martin's criticism (at Religious Affections) of Matt Olson's statement is, intentionally or unintentionally, unfair.  It's clear that Olson was advocating the approach that Joel helpfully elaborated on.  Basically this:  if you disagree with the music choices for the NIU services, that's fine, we're not going to make it a controversy by forcing you to participate; we don't want you to violate your conscience; if you want to discuss it, discussion with the administration is encouraged; but don't sow discord and demean those who are participating in the chosen music as irreverent.  This seems to me to be similar to BJU's policy (when I was there) that Calvinism was not going to be a controversy.  You could be a Calvinist or not -- there were students and faculty on both sides -- but you couldn't fight with people about it.  I think they may have had a similar policy about KJVO.

Jay's picture

I think they may have had a similar policy about KJVO.

Yes, they do.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Andrew Henderson's picture

mmartin wrote:

Obnoxious progressives... There are some one this blog and many commenting on other blogs & sites, including the “Redeemed” youtube video, who are expressing their opinions with a condescending attitude towards conservative, traditional beliefs regarding worship and music.

 

Mmartin,

Considering your posts here and on another thread about the same issue, your words here seem pretty disingenuous. Here is a snippet of your own condescending attitude:

“Both Joel & Jason need to get out more if they actually believe what they are saying... The age card?  Really?  Is that the best you can do?... Yes things are different now from 50 years ago, but Kudos on the false argument... You have to be either willfully naive or completely out of touch... Don't do this stupid, trying too hard to be rationale, dance around the issue... It isn't that hard-if you are willing to be honest about it...”

If you are going to be so condescending yourself, it is probably not wise to attempt to shine a light on how condescending those on the other side of the issue are.

Andrew Henderson

BryanBice's picture

Andrew Henderson wrote:

mmartin wrote:

Obnoxious progressives... There are some one this blog and many commenting on other blogs & sites, including the “Redeemed” youtube video, who are expressing their opinions with a condescending attitude towards conservative, traditional beliefs regarding worship and music.

 

Mmartin,

Considering your posts here and on another thread about the same issue, your words here seem pretty disingenuous. Here is a snippet of your own condescending attitude:

“Both Joel & Jason need to get out more if they actually believe what they are saying... The age card?  Really?  Is that the best you can do?... Yes things are different now from 50 years ago, but Kudos on the false argument... You have to be either willfully naive or completely out of touch... Don't do this stupid, trying too hard to be rationale, dance around the issue... It isn't that hard-if you are willing to be honest about it...”

If you are going to be so condescending yourself, it is probably not wise to attempt to shine a light on how condescending those on the other side of the issue are.

May I also suggest, Mmartin, that you please take a couple hours to read & digest Humble Orthodoxy by Josh Harris?

Chris Ames's picture

Greg Long wrote:

I don't understand your response, so I'll try to be more specific in my point.

You posted this:

Joel,

You would discipline an otherwise faithful believer out of your church for not singing along with songs that he is convinced are either beneath the glory of God or contrary to his understanding of Christianity?

Hmm... Where have I heard that before?

...which, of course, was not was Joel Tetreau was saying at all.

.... of course it wasn't. How obvious to anyone who agrees with you. I thought condescension was more of a "vice list" sort of characteristic than a pastoral requirement, but perhaps you're relying on a variant reading of 1 Timothy.

*sigh*

Yes, Greg, it is perfectly obvious the analogy that whatsisname is making. It is also evidently somewhat less obvious that he is making the analogy in question in parallel with an argument that you folks feel in your hearts is cut from the same bolt of cloth: KJVO vs. whatever TGC endorses.

Read the second sentence slowly. It may be helpful to diagram it if you're able: you'll find a chapter in Fee's volume on New Testament Exegesis that will assist you if you've never done it before. Then it will be perfectly clear and we'll walk away good friends, no doubt.

The problem with your "=fine" analysis is that it's not fine. It's compromise at best. It's awful. I don't know how to describe it to you, because you seem like you'd be comfortable if the Toronto Blessing took roost in your church. You'll probably never know what it feels like to have your Savior compared to a boyfriend or a therapist. So I really don't know what to say to you. There is a great gulf fix't, and I realize that shouting across it at y'all just gives you opportunity to sin, so I'm done.

See ya!

 

Greg Long's picture

Chris Ames wrote:

Greg Long wrote:

I don't understand your response, so I'll try to be more specific in my point.

You posted this:

Joel,

You would discipline an otherwise faithful believer out of your church for not singing along with songs that he is convinced are either beneath the glory of God or contrary to his understanding of Christianity?

Hmm... Where have I heard that before?

...which, of course, was not was Joel Tetreau was saying at all.

.... of course it wasn't. How obvious to anyone who agrees with you. I thought condescension was more of a "vice list" sort of characteristic than a pastoral requirement, but perhaps you're relying on a variant reading of 1 Timothy.

*sigh*

Yes, Greg, it is perfectly obvious the analogy that whatsisname is making. It is also evidently somewhat less obvious that he is making the analogy in question in parallel with an argument that you folks feel in your hearts is cut from the same bolt of cloth: KJVO vs. whatever TGC endorses.

Read the second sentence slowly. It may be helpful to diagram it if you're able: you'll find a chapter in Fee's volume on New Testament Exegesis that will assist you if you've never done it before. Then it will be perfectly clear and we'll walk away good friends, no doubt.

The problem with your "=fine" analysis is that it's not fine. It's compromise at best. It's awful. I don't know how to describe it to you, because you seem like you'd be comfortable if the Toronto Blessing took roost in your church. You'll probably never know what it feels like to have your Savior compared to a boyfriend or a therapist. So I really don't know what to say to you. There is a great gulf fix't, and I realize that shouting across it at y'all just gives you opportunity to sin, so I'm done.

See ya!

 

Wow. Absolutely unbelievable. I'll ignore your condescension and just say that I'm sorry you can't explain your point here.

But I have to ask...1) What in the world does the Toronto Blessing have to do with this discussion? and 2) On what basis do you come to the conclusion that I would seem to be "comfortable if the Toronto Blessing took roost" in my church? That makes me smile, seeing as how I have actually taught a class on spiritual gifts in our church and presented the biblical case for cessationism.

-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)

Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA

Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University

Pages