BJU Releases Music Philosophy

[Pastor Joe Roof]

Why did BJU put out a music philosophy statement? I thought their philosophy of music was pretty clear before this statement.

Via a campus contact, I understood this to be a document that has been in the works for months, if not years. I also understand them to have had policies and various means of addressing the philosophical reasons behind those polices by citations, but not one streamlined document that could be pointed to that would articulate their position.

I think the statement is concise and easy to understand. Whether one agrees with it or not, I think it makes pretty clear for the prospective student what one can expect while a BJU student, and why, for sure.

It will be interesting to see exactly how the applications will remain “essentially unchanged.” They appear to have left themselves a little wiggle room as to how the principles will be enforced.

[DHarry]

You cannot separate the theological views of a person from the songs that they write. Music by its nature either teaches us truth or reinforces truth already known. True, writers from long ago had some theological views that I may not agree with, however, I am not likely to know anything more about Fanny Crosby’s doctrine than the songs that have survived that we still sing because of their solid theological teaching. However, I have two observations:

1. It is not wise to hold on to old hymns that are weak doctrinally simply because they were the hymns we grew up with. Frankly, many of the older hymns were written at a time where every song was set to a specific musical pattern whether it matched the words or not…and where words were often just used as fillers to make the rhythm work. I would give examples but would probably be chastised so I will challenge you to look through your old hymnal and find the songs I am referring to. [/Quote]

This I agree. It is funny when people challenge the songs of today but gloss over the songs of yesteryear, just because they are use to them.

[DHarry]

2. It is very dangerous to accept a persons theological positions (as written in song) if you disagree with their theological positions as stated in their doctrinal statement. For example, I do not listen to SGM music. Why? Because I disagree with their position on Soteriology and it is incredible how many times that view affects the words used in their songs. I disagree with their overemphasis of the sovereignty of God. It shows up in almost every song they write. If I disagree with them theologically it would be foolish of me to put my blinders on and to say that I can then listen to their music and it be of no effect.

[/Quote]

This is fine for you personally, but I am not sure it can hold up to a standard. What does it matter their theological positions (especially when oftentimes they don’t even write the song. They are just a publisher. If the theology is truly wrong in the song, then we shouldn’t sing it. Again, the overemphasis on the Sovereignty of God is a preference. There is nothing theologically wrong with singing about God’s sovereignty. The same can be said of southern gospel music that tends to be musically sappy and overemphasizes about our experiences when we get to heaven.

Really?

Attempts to couple worldly vehicles like rock music (and other pop styles) with sacred lyrics and settings create a moral tension for the believer and contradict the Christian’s call to a consecrated approach to life (Rom. 12:1–2).

moral tension or cultural conditioning tension?

It is clear that BJU take the extreme position of including “sound” as a moral element. They are saying certain chord combinations, beat are inherently moral.

An observation and disagreement. I don’t have time to perch online and discuss this ad nauseam.

…that the publisher of the song isn’t the main issue (to me). However, if a publisher consistently creates/sings/produces music with the same theological direction, it quickly becomes on sided and unbalanced.

If I preach every Sunday on the sovereignty of God, if I teach it in Sunday School, if it comes up in devotions…one would say that I am presenting a skewed view of God. Why? Because God is so much more than just sovereign and in my attempt to communicate my belief in God’s sovereignty, I have wrongly communicated my God.

If on a CD, 8 out of 10 songs emphasize the sovereignty of God over creation, over nature, over mankind, my dependence on a sovereign God, God’s sovereignty in salvation, God’s sovereignty in trials, my submission to a sovereign God…have we not communicated a wrong message about our God? I think that a ministry that has a wrong or misplaced theology will present itself in the music that it produces/sings/endorses.

OR, if on a CD, 8 of 10 songs emphasize me coming to God, what God did for me, my choosing God, me getting ready, when I get carried away, I’m not giving up, I’ll fly away, How my life changed from sin, How my world was rearranged, how God heard my cry and saved me, … I think we get the point.

To bring it home, if we cannot accept blindly the music of years past simply because it was the music we grew up with (even if it was misplaced or shallow doctrinally), how can we accept the music of today even if it is misplaced doctrinally? We can’t. The final authority must be the filter of God’s Word. For me, if the author has a skewed view of a major theological theme, it will always find it’s way out in his/her music.

If you’re choosing to object to the Calvinism in SGM songs, I can understand that. I don’t think that will present many problems for many on this site, though. I would go so far as to say it is actually an attractant for many, in fact.

DHarry,

You assume that if someone likes an SGM song that they like the totality of the library and that library is used exclusively. I agree if we only sing Wesley hymns or Fanny Crosby or SGM exclusively than we have a problem. We pick and choose some. Just because one group emphasizes that in their singing, doesn’t mean it is theologically incorrect, only if you are exclusively singing it would you have a problem. If every Sunday we preached solely out of Romans, it wouldn’t make the sermons anymore or any less theologically correct, but it would make the totality of what you taught over many years, skewed. So I can see your point, but I wouldn’t say we can wholesale wipe all of the songs out. You would need to act with balance, just as you do your preaching.

I believe it is fine that BJU saw a need to present this statement. But my concern is that this music issue is being elevated as the top concern in the BJU fundamentalists circles. Certainly, as we follow the Lord, concerns will arise out of differences that require our prayers, discussions over differences, the seeking of ways to correct one another where needed and forebear one another in love where needed. But if our main concern is whether a church in plunking an organ or picking a guitar, whe are going to miss the issues that need to be much more important to us.

I just spoke at a missions conference this weekend and shared these info points about where God has placed me to serve. Can I request that we consider putting at least as much passion in fuguring out how to do something about these needs as we do in discussing music?

7 billion people in the world today.
No more than 20 percent know Christ as Savior.

We are in the most lost region of America - the Northeast.
66 Million people living in CT,ME, MA, NJ, NH, NY, PA, RI, and VT.
Estimated that 51 million of these are without Christ. That is 82%.

In NY, NJ, CT, and MA, there are 27 million lost people who speak over 800 languages

In NY State there are 19,541,453 people. Of that, 560,678 claim to be evangelical. That means that 97 percent are lost.

Albany – one of the top 13 most unreached places in America.

On April 2, 2013, the Albany Times Union announced that Capital Region is one of the least religious places in America according to a recent Gallup poll.

Barna is reporting that the Capital Region of New York State is the most post-Christian place in America. His chart shows that New York State is basicaly the most post-Christian state in the Union.

As a BJU grad, I found this statement much more thoughtful and balanced than the school’s position was in the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s. That is striking enough, but even more striking to me is the repeated acknowledgment that “other institutions, congregations and individuals may apply these principles differently than BJU will apply them based upon their own efforts to reflect scriptural principles within their respective contexts and in keeping with their unique institutional missions.” The recognition that the BJU way is not the only way and that others may have different applications while still making “efforts to reflect scriptural principles” is huge. Gone (apparently) is the nose in the air attitude and the dismissal of those who make different applications as “worldly.” Assuming I’m reading this correctly, bravo. BRAVO!

Also, if my understanding of this policy is correct, BJU just cut the legs out from under Matt Olson’s and NIU’s critics on this issue. Apparently too late to help Olson.

As someone else noted above, however, the final paragraph ostensibly defining rock music strikes a discordant note. It’s glaringly out of sync and more in line with the silly generalizations of the “old” approach. It really ought to be dropped entirely.

[DHarry]

If on a CD, 8 out of 10 songs emphasize the sovereignty of God over creation, over nature, over mankind, my dependence on a sovereign God, God’s sovereignty in salvation, God’s sovereignty in trials, my submission to a sovereign God…have we not communicated a wrong message about our God? I think that a ministry that has a wrong or misplaced theology will present itself in the music that it produces/sings/endorses.

You’re assuming that God’s sovereignty isn’t emphasized to that degree in scripture.

But many of us here believe that as God is the primary actor in all of history, all of scripture explicitly or implicitly teaches his sovereignty. And as such, we’re going to call it out through all of scripture, and it will naturally pervade all of our music—in the same way that it pervades our teaching and preaching and meditation.

BJU’s brand is that of traditional evangelicalism (or Fundamentalism). If it doesn’t remain conservative on issues such as music, it will lose its base. If you lose your base, you end up like Tennessee Temple or Northland.

Sure, what BJU offers may cause its pool of students to grow smaller and smaller each year, but to radically change would bring about a crash in enrollment. BJU is what it is. (And many of us like it.)

Romans 14:14-

“   I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.”

just sayin’

[Pastor Joe Roof] I just spoke at a missions conference this weekend and shared these info points about where God has placed me to serve. Can I request that we consider putting at least as much passion in fuguring out how to do something about these needs as we do in discussing music?

7 billion people in the world today.
No more than 20 percent know Christ as Savior.

We are in the most lost region of America - the Northeast.
66 Million people living in CT,ME, MA, NJ, NH, NY, PA, RI, and VT.
Estimated that 51 million of these are without Christ. That is 82%.

In NY, NJ, CT, and MA, there are 27 million lost people who speak over 800 languages

In NY State there are 19,541,453 people. Of that, 560,678 claim to be evangelical. That means that 97 percent are lost.

Albany – one of the top 13 most unreached places in America.

On April 2, 2013, the Albany Times Union announced that Capital Region is one of the least religious places in America according to a recent Gallup poll.

Barna is reporting that the Capital Region of New York State is the most post-Christian place in America. His chart shows that New York State is basicaly the most post-Christian state in the Union.

+1

In the words of Luke - “Brothers, come over to Macedonia and help us!”

[dmyers]

Also, if my understanding of this policy is correct, BJU just cut the legs out from under Matt Olson’s and NIU’s critics on this issue. Apparently too late to help Olson.

I don’t quite follow this… as a critic of Matt and NIU, my perception is that the BJU statement contradicts the recent NIU changes. So would you care to elaborate?

Dmyers,

At this point none of us know why the NIU board fired Matt. Matt has been outspoken about his changes with the full knowledge of the board. It may not be about the music at all. It could be about speakers in chapel and Bible class such as Jason Janz, Guy Conn, Bruce Ware. It could be that they didn’t like the way he managed the changes. It could be the rapid decline of students in the school over the last five years. We don’t know and apparently Matt doesn’t understand why he was fired. I have known Matt for almost 40 years. I feel badly for him personally. At the same time, if Matt wants to operate in another circle, that is his choice at this point in his life. Matt, with his skills in preaching and extensive experience, should be able to find a ministry in the near future. Northland has been a sister institution with BJU for about 30 years, similar in doctrine and philosophy. I would like to see NIU adopt a similar statement on music and worship that BJU did. Maybe they already have and simply need to blow the dust off it.