Conference yukon::christian_v7

    YOU CAN HAVE IT!  :-)
    
    Markel
    
    p.s.  Just wait until the playoffs...

>    p.s.  Just wait until the playoffs...
    

             <<< Note 86.3 by FRETZ::HEISER "it's your destiny" >>>
                               -< Chicago who? >-




You remember them, Mike.  They're the ones in all the sneaker 
commercials.  They wanna be like Mike.

Sandy

    

        Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.  If
        any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For
        all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of
        the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of
        the world.

	I John 1:15-16

        Rock, Rap, "country", etc, the music associated with rebellion and
        sin, appealing to the prurient and salacious nature we all have
        even after we are saved, cannot be used to bring glory to God.  If
        you mix the world with Jesus, what you have is the world, not
        Jesus.  We are commanded to be holy, even as He is holy.  We should
        strive to let only those things that appeal to our new spirit into
        our eye gate and ear gate.  Would Jesus "boogie" to the noise
        generated from these sources? 

        Please, dear brothers and sisters, consider what it is that is
        behind this music, irrespective of the words, which are barely
        audible or discernable in most cases.  Please consider discon-
        necting or removing that electric sewer (TV) from your homes. 
        Reading to your kids is interactive.  Being hypnotized by the TV is
        not.  Compare the time you spend in devotions to that spent in
        front of that thing watching people commit every kind of sin
        imaginable.  

        When our TV broke last fall, and the repairman said that it was
        irreparable, we decided, albeit hesistantly, not to replace it. 
        What a blessing it has been to sit, read, play with my daughter,
        and entertain friends and relatives without that one-eyed beast
        glaring out from the center of the living room.

	With respect and love for you all ...

	Tony

>        When our TV broke last fall, and the repairman said that it was
>        irreparable, we decided, albeit hesistantly, not to replace it. 
>        What a blessing it has been to sit, read, play with my daughter,
>        and entertain friends and relatives without that one-eyed beast
>        glaring out from the center of the living room.
    
    Glory be!  Another convert!
    
    :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) 
    
    Mark L. 

    
    I wonder.  Did man corrupt music or did music corrupt man?
    
    I can see Jesus "boogieing" in His time.  I'm sure music was a part of
    every Jewish celebration and dancing as well.
    
    jeff

 I have cut back on TV watching considerably, particularly because of the times
 I have my kids who are seemingly hooked on the thing.  I agree there is
 little of redeeming value on television. 

 I understand the sentiment about ZTV being a "worldlike" endeavor, however...
 kids are influenced a great deal by music, and many watch the swill that is
 pumped out over the airwaves on MTV, and perhaps, just maybe, channel surfing
 kids will come across ZTV and catch a message or 2 in the music, or other 
 offerings.  And it may be the only opportunity they have to hear that there is
 a different life available to them than that offered by the heavy/death metal
 or other music/video they are offered.  

 What interests me, in a negative sense, will be how MTV will counter the 
 message the ZTV may offer.




 Jim

    This should shake out the dust...
    
    I heard a Pastor preaching and he used these words to describe reaching
    the teens of today, yep, he's a fundamentalist preacher and is against
    any kind of Rock-n-roll, no matter what the lyrics are.
    
    "You shouldn't get down to their level, but help them come to Christ,
    then watch them soar."
    
    Jim, I *hear* your rationalization, I just don't think its necessary. 
    When Nicky Cruz got saved, David Wilkerson went to the streets, stood on
    the back of a truck and preached the Word of God, he didn't dress in
    leathers, and don an earring [oops] and have some converted rock artist
    singing...  I just don't think its necessary to get into the *worldly*
    things to win them to Christ.  More importantly, its going where they
    are, understa��nding their struggles... you don't have to use music
    that is ungodly to do so.
    
    Personal convictions are just that, personal.  But I ask if you cannot
    understand the words if screaming guitars permeate the air, who has
    been glorified?  My personal conviction, is not the message *behind*
    the music, the *message* in front of the music.  If I can't discern the
    words *CLEARLY*, I don't listen to it.  
    
    Tony... I'd have to say I agree with you, Bro [tho' there aren't many
    who do].
    
    Nancy

Re: .-1

>> you don't have to use music that is ungodly to do so.

This reminds me of an old guy that decided to take a really vile song and
set some Christian lyrics to it.  Just to see if it would catch on.
Well it did.  An instant success, even.  The guy received a good deal of
criticism from his peers, though.  Anyone who recognized the tune associated
it with its former lyrics.

Maybe you've heard it?  It goes something like this:

	"Ein feste burg is unser Gott!  Ein gute weir und wafen!"
	(please forgive my ommisions of the umlauts)

Or maybe in a different language:

	"A might fortress is our God!  A good shield and weapon!"

Martin Luther set new lyrics to the tune of a popular German Beer-Drinking
song.  And from what I recall, a fairly raunchy one at that.  Certainly, in
Luther's day, this seemed just as foul as screaming guitars may be to us.

Personal preferences dictate the style of "art" we use to praise God.
Spreading the Gospel does sometimes requires breaking away from what we
consider to be the mainstream.  Even without full gang-garb, I doubt that
Nicky Cruz would have been accepted very well in many of the mainline
churches of his day.  In the same sense, I'd imagine a business-type guy in
a three-piece could have had the same outreach Cruz had.  (I haven't actually
read 'The Cross and the Switchblade.'  I'm making a guess.)

I find myself constantly troubled by this.  When I'm in church, I want to
sing from a hymnal, with a full score in FOUR PARTS.  (well, OK, I'll
sing one part and everybody else can take the others 8^)  The problem is,
I haven't been able to convince everyone in my church to share in my
affection for "solemn, dirge-like hymns."  So they go on with their hand-
waiving, guitar-strumming, hand-clapping, overhead-projector music.
Meanwhile I just try to figure out how to sing the bass line.  8^)

Sigh.  Someday maybe they'll be able to appreciate REAL music.  <.(

>> If I can't discern the words *CLEARLY*, I don't listen to it.

That's probably a pretty good rule of thumb for any music!  8^)

[I don't mean to be too critical here.  But if we're going to make
 comparisons, I'm sure there's some music I enjoy that would easily
 put you to sleep!]

Rick

        RE: 86.7
	
	And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he
	said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp.  And he said,
	It is not the voice of them that cry for being overcome, but the
	noise of them that sing, I do hear.  And it came to pass, as soon
	as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf and the
	dancing; and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of
	his hands, and break them beneath the mount.

	And ... Moses saw that the people were naked ...

	Exodus 32:17-19, 25

>>>    I wonder.  Did man corrupt music or did music corrupt man?

        Satan corrupted both.  From there, it has been a vicious cycle that
        has spiralled down to the bacchanalian debauchery that passes for
        entertainment today.
    
>>>    I can see Jesus "boogieing" in His time.  I'm sure music was a part of
>>>    every Jewish celebration and dancing as well.
    
        Not every celebration is Godly.  "Boogieing" appeals to the lust of
        the flesh, with people in revealing clothing (naked according to
        Mosaic law) "strutting their stuff."  There is no example of Jesus
        "boogieing" or doing anything to appeal to the sin nature of the
        flesh.

	Love to you all,

	Tony
	

    I'll walk a mile with Rick (.10).
    
    "O happy day, O Happy day
    when Jesus washed my sins away
    He taught me how to watch and pray
    And live rejoicing everyday
    Happy day!  Happy day! 
    When Jesus washed my sins away.
    
    Some may sing the same notes and have it come out
    
    "How dry I am, how wet I'll be
    If I can't find the bathroom key."
    
    And there are others.  Nancy and Tony C., I'll warrant there is
    such a thing as devil's music, but I'd stop short of proclaiming it to
    be rock and roll, or country (that one puzzled me; is it the steel
    guitars).  
    
    And I'm close to full agreement on the TV.  I have one, and watch
    occasionally.  There isn't much to glean from it these days, but there
    are the rare occasions.
    
    It isn't the instrument (music, TV) but the message.  
    And I like Amy Grant's secular stuff, too.

    .11 Tony C.
    
    I think we have a couple of different items here:
    
    Christian Music that happens to be of the rock and roll style
    and lewdness.
    
    No, I don't see Jesus boogieing with those in Exodus, but I do see
    Jesus dancing at a wedding (not recorded).  (By the way, I don't
    dance. But King David did.)
    
    So we know that these people in Exodus were wrong, and the dance of
    Salome (for Herod) was also wrong, but the dance of David was right.
    
    *HOW* and *FOR WHAT PURPOSE* something is done is of paramount
    importance.  Whatever we do, do it for God.  And I happen to believe
    that Rock and Roll can be done for God.

    There was a study done at one of the Universitys with music.  They took
    animals and placed them in a room with music piped in, they used all
    types, classical, rock-n-roll, country, etc.  Then they watched the
    effects music had on the animals... 
    
    It seems that your acid rock made the animals go mad. 
    
    Amy Grant's stuff is okay... there is the line between pop rock and
    *steel* rock... and its the latter that I feel [*personal* conviction]
    is ungodly no matter what lyrics are placed with it.
    
    Nancy

    I can't believe how naive some people still are about music.  There is
    no morality in music, even Keith Green said so.  Let's not just pick on
    rock either.  Rebellion has been in folk music since before King David 
    wrote Psalms about defeating his enemies.  Mozart and Beethoven defied the
    authorities of their day in their music.  If you want to pick on rock,
    you have to include all forms of music.
    
    Music (no style is specified) was created as a method to worship God.  

    Mr. Heiser,
    
    Naivity is in the mind. :-) :-) :-)
    
    Nancy

	If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his
	skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat,
	shall it be holy?  And the priests answered and said, No.  Then
	said Haggai, if one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of
	these, shall it be unclean?  And the priests answered and said, It
	shall be unclean.  Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this
	people, and so is this nation, before me, saith the LORD; and so is
	every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is
	unclean.

	Haggai 2:12-14

        You cannot make the unclean clean by touching it with the clean. 
        What this does instead, dear brothers and sisters, is to profane
        that which is holy.

        Music in which the beat (pulse) is the dominant element appeals to
        the flesh, irrespective of the lyrics.  Find the most rebellious
        folk song, played with nothing more than piano or acousic guitar,
        strip it of its lyrics, and it becomes innocuous.

        Find the most God-praising rock/rap/country song, where the beat
        dominates, and the instrumentation is showy and loud, or sappy and
        soapy, strip it of its lyrics, and it will appeal to the flesh.  It
        will sound like any other pop or rock or rap song or any other
        beer-soaked lament, and it will surreptitiously tug at the sin
        nature in you and your kin.

	Love,
		Tony

Tony C. (.17)

>        You cannot make the unclean clean by touching it with the clean. 
>        What this does instead, dear brothers and sisters, is to profane
>        that which is holy.

You quoted scripture about the ceremonial uncleanlieness and then apply
this uncleanliness to music.  I respect your opinion, but do not hold it.

>        Music in which the beat (pulse) is the dominant element appeals to
>        the flesh, irrespective of the lyrics.  Find the most rebellious
>        folk song, played with nothing more than piano or acousic guitar,
>        strip it of its lyrics, and it becomes innocuous.

True.  Remove the lyrics and it becomes innocuous, (unless the lyric linger
in one's head).

>        Find the most God-praising rock/rap/country song, where the beat
>        dominates, and the instrumentation is showy and loud, or sappy and
>        soapy, strip it of its lyrics, and it will appeal to the flesh.  It
>        will sound like any other pop or rock or rap song or any other
>        beer-soaked lament, and it will surreptitiously tug at the sin
>        nature in you and your kin.

See the references to Happy Day and A Mighty Fortress.  These songs *changed* 
the profane to the sublime and so I contend with your opinion.

I say we take back territory that is stolen by the devil.  Music, in
and of itself is subjectively innocuous or profane (there is music that
offends me - without words even).  But the application of the music is
veyr important.  

As to territory stolen (or profaned), put away those rainbow stickers, for
the New Agers have taken a shine to them.  Oh, and crystals are a very hot
item.

But on another tack, the Scripture you quote is a good for holiness:
Zodhiates says of Haggai 2:10-19 "This third message of encouragement
involves the Scripture's teaching on holiness.  Personal holiness comes
only by conscious effort, and sinfulness spreads and increases in one's life
unless it is effectively combatted as well...."

So, if I may take the nugget of truth, the principle of the matter, from
your reply ni .17, Tony: we should be wary of the things [music, television,
reading, et cetera] of what we feed our minds.

Mark

 I can, I suppose, understand some of the concerns expressed here.  No question
 most secular rock music is of questionable spirtitual value.  In an effort
 to get my younger kids (16 and 10) intersted in the Lord, I have been playing
 Christian rock music around my apartment or in the car (versus the music I 
 used to listen to) along with other non-rock Christian music.  And while the
 song is playing I'll use it as a prompt for questions to ask them..for now it
 is a good inroad.  Myself, I like some Christian rock (Petra is about the
 heaviest I'll get) but I also love hymns, folky type music and play an even
 distribution of all of those.  




 Jim

1.
>>You quoted scripture about the ceremonial uncleanlieness and then apply
>>this uncleanliness to music.  I respect your opinion, but do not hold it.

2.
>>But on another tack, the Scripture you quote is a good for holiness:
>>Zodhiates says of Haggai 2:10-19 "This third message of encouragement
>>involves the Scripture's teaching on holiness.  Personal holiness comes
>>only by conscious effort, and sinfulness spreads and increases in one's life
>>unless it is effectively combatted as well...."
>>
>>So, if I may take the nugget of truth, the principle of the matter, from
>>your reply ni .17, Tony: we should be wary of the things [music, television,
>>reading, et cetera] of what we feed our minds.

	Amen.  Please, for the sake of holiness, apply paragraph 2 to
	music in paragraph 1.

>>See the references to Happy Day and A Mighty Fortress.  These songs *changed* 
>>the profane to the sublime and so I contend with your opinion.

        If someone was to take the musical scores from either of these two
        songs (or any musical score, for that matter), add base, drums, and
        your choice or any combination of screeching lead guitar, doleful
        saxophone, wailing pedal steel, or cacophonic keyboards,
        accompanied by affected, accentuated, and sensuous vocals, the
        impact of the words and melody would shrink to insignificance. 
        This is not territory stolen by the devil.  It was invented by him.

>>As to territory stolen (or profaned), put away those rainbow stickers, for
>>the New Agers have taken a shine to them.  Oh, and crystals are a very hot
>>item.

        Indeed, we should avoid giving the appearance that we place any
        spiritual importance on images or objects wrought by the hands of
        men or appearing in nature.  

	Love,
		Tony
		

Tony C.
  We really agree more than we disagree, you know.  But where one "draws
the line" is different, I think.  I've had this "line" discussion before
on several topics.
  We agree on the principle:

me>We should be wary of the things [music, television,
me>reading, et cetera] of what we feed our minds.
>
You>	Amen.

  But we do not see eye to eye on its application:

>Please, for the sake of holiness, apply paragraph 2 to music in paragraph 1.

  What if I did not see anything wrong with a strong drum beat, or bass line?
If I did, I might not like any of the JP Sousa marches (which I do).

  I'll bet we agree on being open to the Holy Spirit as to His taste in music
for our lives, how it affects us, and how it may affect others.  But do you
think that it could be possible for the Holy Spirit to OK a[n unspecified]
song for me and not for you?  Or could it be possible that the Holy Spirit
could tell you that this [unspecified song] was okay, but to me was out
of bounds?

>>>See the references to Happy Day and A Mighty Fortress.  These songs *changed* 
>>>the profane to the sublime and so I contend with your opinion.
>
>       If someone was to take the musical scores from either of these two
>        songs (or any musical score, for that matter), add base, drums, and
>        your choice or any combination of screeching lead guitar, doleful
>        saxophone, wailing pedal steel, or cacophonic keyboards,
>        accompanied by affected, accentuated, and sensuous vocals, the
>        impact of the words and melody would shrink to insignificance. 
>        This is not territory stolen by the devil.  It was invented by him.

At their time, when they were written, these bar room songs WERE the 
territory of the devil.  I'd love to hear a gospel choir like the
Morning Star Baptist church in Dorcester MA sing O Happy Day, and they
would be LOUD and raise the roof off the ceiling in praise to God.
They might even have a throbbing bass, who knows.

No, I think, God CAN be glorified through music (notes, etc) that may also
be used to profane God.  How the music is performed and presented is key.

Mark

	I agree with Mike, music itself is amoral.  It's what you do with
	the music that matters.  I frequently move about as we sing worship
	songs in church on Sunday.  

	I will sing
	I will dance
	I will sing, I will dance 
	to the Lord

	Just last night, I had Rich Mullins playing on the tape deck, and
	was singing to the Lord.  A song with a snappy beat came on ,
	and I began to dance and sing in the kitchen while I cooked.  I don't
	think the Lord minded a bit, though Emily thought I was quite comical!

	Lyrics are very very key.  My sisters were buying up all the new
	Van Morrison albums the last few years, and on first listen, liked
	them very much.  Then one sister said to me, "I like his old stuff
	better, his new music is all Christian songs"... at least she noticed ;-\
	However, she'll keep listening to them, because she likes the music.
	Who knows, maybe some of those words will sink in ?!

	Karen

    If you notice in my notes, I tried to place emphasis on *personal
    conviction*... someone very wisely has stated what may be sin to one
    person could possibly not be to another... example:
    
    A '67 Chevy, red, with white interior...beautiful. To one man, it is a
    collector's item, something enjoyable, to another it could be an
    obsession... when the church needs pews, the car needs a new chrome
    bumper, etc...  The key is that while one man can own it, another man
    worships it, the car can take the place of God in many ways.
    
    This too can be with music [I have a *personal* conviction that any
    music that overpowers the message of the lyrics is not godly], this
    type of music is a stumbling block to me.  Also, seductive rhythms and
    beats in music are a stumbling block to me as they produce sensual
    moods that a single woman ought to avoid.
    
    Whether it be music, cars, a TV, camper, boat, spa, or hobby [your fave
    here] of any kind, it becomes sin when:
    
    1. God cannot be glorified in it
    2. It has taken precedence of your life
    3. It causes a reaction that is ungodly [such as seductive music]
    
    Now, that is my guideline, I ain't perfect in it, don't claim to be,
    but I have a goal.  
    
    God's words says that our lives can be changed by the *renewing of our
    mind*, that statement is too powerful to dismiss what our senses take
    in that effect the way we think, act, and behave.
    
    In Him,
    Nancy

>        Find the most God-praising rock/rap/country song, where the beat
>        dominates, and the instrumentation is showy and loud, or sappy and
>        soapy, strip it of its lyrics, and it will appeal to the flesh.  It
>        will sound like any other pop or rock or rap song or any other
>        beer-soaked lament, and it will surreptitiously tug at the sin
>        nature in you and your kin.
    
    I guess I better burn my "Petra Praise" and Maranatha Praise Band
    albums then.  After all, worship choruses with percussion only appeals
    to the flesh.

    I think this article sums it up best...
    
                 <<< ATLANA::DUB1:[NOTES$LIBRARY]CCM.NOTE;1 >>>
                       -< Contemporary Christian Music >-
================================================================================
Note 43.0                Music: Tool of Satan or of God?              16 replies
PNO::HEISER "I hate it when it is 116�F!!!"         213 lines  19-JUN-1989 12:19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Reprinted without permission from "Don't Stop the Music" by Dana Key]

Tool of Satan or Tool of God?
-----------------------------

My phone number used to be listed in the Memphis phone book.  That was
before the arrival of "the crazed caller."  I didn't know his name,
his age, or where he lived -- but I did know 4 things about him: he
seemed somewhat mentally unbalanced; he was a big fan of DeGarmo &
Key; he thought I could help him; and he would do anything he could to
talk to me on the phone.

On a typical day, he would call 3 or 4 times.  I don't know when he
slept, but he seemed to think I never did, because he would call me at
all hours of the day and night.  I cared about this mysterious caller,
and I prayed for him often.  But he began calling me so often that I
had to come up with a solution.  I told all my friends.  "Look, this
guy is driving me crazy.  If you want to call me on the phone, let my
phone ring once, hang up, and call me back."

That helped -- but one big problem remained.  Some nights when my
family was sound asleep, he would call 3 or 4 times and let the phone
ring over and over.  So I tried unplugging the phone -- but that meant
I couldn't receive calls from people I needed to talk to.

Finally, I broke down and got an unlisted phone number.  And my
problem with "the crazed caller" was over.  But you know what?  Never
during all of these problems did I think that the problem was really
the phone itself.  I knew the problem was with the caller, who was
abusing and misusing the phone.

Tools Can Be Used for Many Purposes

One of the biggest questions people have about rock music is whether
God can really use it for His purposes.  It's an important issue, and
one Eddie and I hear raised often.  The Bible tells us much about what
is right and what is wrong.  There are right and wrong actions
(praying for and caring for people are right, but murder, lying, and
theft are wrong).  There are right and wrong attitudes (love and
compassion are right, but anger, envy, and lust are wrong).  But do
you know what?  There are few things -- meaning concrete, physical
objects -- that God says are wrong.

Look around you at all the objects we have in our world.  Most of them
can be used for good or bad purposes.  Their "goodness" or "badness"
isn't part of their inherent nature; it depends on how they are used
by humans -- whether for good or for bad.

That's why I told you about my mysterious caller.  By itself, my phone
was just an inert, passive object.  My friends used the phone to talk
to me and tell me things I wanted to hear.  But in the hands of the
mysterious caller, the phone became a major cause of discomfort and
distress (as well as many sleepless nights)!  You can apply this
principle of good and bad uses to almost any object.  Look at guns.
Misused, they can kill innocent people: used properly, they can defend
your family or country from thieves or invaders.  Or look at
automobiles.  In the hands of a drunk driver, a car is a deadly
weapon.  But on the other hand, an ambulance is a vehicle that brings
healing and mercy.  Music is like automobiles.  It's a vehicle that
can be used to bring good things or bad.  It can lead you close to
God, or it can lead you further away.  It's a tool that can be used
for many purposes.

Music and Lyrics

Some people say, "The beat and tone of rock music sound like they are
straight out of hell."  Many take this criticism one step further,
saying that the music -- and all who make it -- are demon-inspired, or
demon-possessed.  And it's true that some of the music of secular
bands like Skinny Puppy can sound hellish.  It's strange to my ears,
and I don't like to hear it.  But that's okay.  I don't have to listen
to it.  Meanwhile, other will think country music or Tiffany sound
bad.  But sound is not the important issue.  It's meaning.  It's what
the song is saying -- and the lyrics of a song are what fives us that
meaning.  I believe that music (particularly instrumental music) is
absolutely devoid of moral qualities for either good or evil.  This is
not to say that there is not good instrumental music or bad
instrumental music.  Instrumental music can be good or bad, but that
isn't a theological issue -- it's an artistic one.  The "goodness" or
"badness" of instrumental music is based on the performer's
competence and skill.  If the music is played without skill, it is
bad.  If it is performed skillfully, it is good.  Therefore, a
particular piece of music could be considered bad, yet not immoral.
And some music could be considered good, yet immoral.  Aren't you glad
I've cleared this up for you?

Music is Used in Many Ways

Today, popular music is being used for bad purposes.  But it has been
that way for a long time.  And Christians have developed some pretty
creative ways of dealing with the issue.  Most Christians feel okay
about singing our national anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner."  They
don't see demons flying around when they sing it; instead, the song
stirs deep patriotic feelings.  And maybe the song means more to me
that to most Americans, because Frances Scott Key is one of my direct
ancestors.  Key wrote the words to the song in a poem called "The
Defense of Fort McHenry."  But he didn't write the music.  That came
from John Stafford Smith, a British man.  And Smith didn't write that
music specifically for Key's words -- in fact, he wrote it for a
British drinking song.  The tune became popular in pubs all over England.

It may seem inappropriate for us to sing about the land of the free
and home of the brave to a melody written for a bunch of people
drinking in bars all across England -- especially since England
happened to be our national enemy at the time.  Yet the same melody
brings teas to our eyes and stirs our patriotism because Key's words
gave that British drinking song an entirely new meaning to us.  The
music is just a vehicle used to communicate an idea.

Martin Luther, the Protestant reformer, was a great songwriter and
theologian; he understood this concept well.  Luther wrote the words
for some of our greatest hymns, but he borrowed the music from popular
German folk songs.  As a result, people had no problem learning
Luther's hymns because they already knew the music.  When we sing
those hymns today we aren't aware of the origin of the music.  It just
sounds like "hymn music" to us.  Many or our greatest hymn writers
have used the popular, secular music of their day for their hymn
lyrics.  Bernard of Clairvoux, a 12th century Christian set the words
for "O Sacred Head Now Wounded" to the tune of a German jig.

Apparently, the writer of many of the Psalms did the same thing.  Look
at the instructions before Psalm 56 ("To the tune of 'A Dove on
Distant Oaks'") and Psalm 57, 58, and 59 ("To the tune of 'Do Not
Destroy'").  These instructions to the "song leader" of the day tell
him which current tune serves as good accompaniment for this psalm.
The origin of the melody is irrelevant; it is the message that is
carried by the music that is important.

"Secular" and "Sacred"?

I hope I haven't ruined "The Star Spangled Banner" or some of your
favorite hymns by telling you where their music came from.  Maybe you
can tolerate the use of secular melodies for sacred songs.  But what
about secular music that isn't used for any sacred purpose at all?
What about plain old "pop" music -- the popular music of our own day?
Is it all right for Christians to listen to and enjoy songs that are
not written by Christians and have no religious or patriotic purpose?
Once Jimmy Swaggart, an outspoken critic of popular music, appeared on
"The 700 Club," a religious TV show.  Someone asked Swaggart what he
thought about the song, "White Christmas," a song your parents and
grandparents have probably heard Bing Crosby sing for years and years.
Swaggart's response was: "The truth is that it's not edifying tot he
cause of Christ; it does not glorify or lift up Jesus Christ."
Therefore, the song was "bad."  For Mr. Swaggart, and many others, if
a song does not specifically mention Christ or speak in religious
jargon it has no value.

In the view of Mr. Swaggart -- as well as many other Christians --
everything needs to be "sacred".  there's no place for the "secular."
This view means there's no place in God's earth for material that
doesn't talk about Christ.  Songs must be about Jesus.  Love poems
would disappear -- unless the poems were about love for God.  Books are
only okay if they are about the Bible, Christians, or Christianity.
Paintings must portray Jesus, crosses or other religious subjects and
themes.  The logical extension of this view is that you could only
receive Christian mail from a Christian postal carrier.  When the
toilet or the sink got clogged up you would need to call a Christian
plumber.  Your breakfast cereal would probably be "Be of Good
Cheer-i-os," and the only toothpaste you would use would be G.L.E.E.M.
(God Loves Everybody, Especially Me)!  You would have to buy your car
from a Christian auto dealer, and you would be required to put "Honk
if you love Jesus" stickers all over the bumpers, fenders, and doors --
as well as over all the windows and windshield.

This is My Father's World

There is only one thing that separates that which is spiritual from
that which is unspiritual.  And it's called sin.  If there is
something sinful in your life, you must throw it away.  There is no
place in the Christian life for casual tolerance of sin.  But if
something is not sinful, it can be used to glorify God, the Creator of
all good and beautiful things.  Martin Luther sums it up very well in
declaring, "The cobbler praises God when he honestly makes a good pair
of shoes."  Or, as the old hymn says, "This is my Father's world."
Likewise, the Apostle Paul says, "Whatever you do, work at it with all
your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men" (Colossians 3:23).
And he says, "Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God" (1
Corinthians 10:31).

We need to remember that Satan is called the god of this age and the
ruler of the world.  Satan does have power here.  But God is greater,
and likewise, greater is the power that is within us.  Satan has
never created of fathered anything except sin, yet some speak of
Lucifer as if he were the creator of music.  He is not.  God is the
creator of music and of all things.  Satan, in his rebellion, has
perverted many areas of God's perfect creation, but he has no power to
bring into being things which did not previously exist.  He can only
rearrange, taint of pervert that which God has already created.  And
that is his strategy concerning modern music.

Satan has invaded many areas of communication and art today: music,
television, movies, books, and radio.  And he would love to claim all
of these as his own creations.  The good news is that these areas are
God's first.  And if Satan has temporarily claimed them, we can
reclaim them and return them to the service of the Creator!  Eddie and
I don't worship rock 'n' roll.  We don't think it's good or bad.  We
do like it, and we know many other people do as well.  And we use it
as a tool to convey the healing, saving message of Christ.

How Will You Use Your Tools?

So what do I say when someone asks me if rock music is a tool of Satan
or a tool of God?  I say, "Yes.  It's both."  So are many other things
in this world.  The important thing to remember is that it's up to us
to use the tools God has given us.  We can use the telephone to bring
good cheer or make obscene phone calls.  We can use music to bless or
condemn.  And we can use our eyes, ears, and mind to take in things
that are bad or things that are good.  It's up to us.

And don't forget:  Your life is a "tool," too.  God has given you that
life along with many talents and gifts, and you can use these gifts to
serve god and man or you can use them to hurt.  It's up to you.

>>  I'll bet we agree on being open to the Holy Spirit as to His taste in music
>>for our lives, how it affects us, and how it may affect others.  But do you
>>think that it could be possible for the Holy Spirit to OK a[n unspecified]
>>song for me and not for you?  Or could it be possible that the Holy Spirit
>>could tell you that this [unspecified song] was okay, but to me was out
>>of bounds?

        This sounds relativistic.  I'm sure the Holy Spirit would want us
        to apply holiness in our lives the same way. He is, afterall, the
        *HOLY* Spirit.  Holiness in our lives is carefully detailed in
        scripture for a purpose.  We are given many types to apply.

        This does not mean that we can't have fun!  Please don't tell me
        that! ;^)  The more we practice holiness, the more pure fun we can
        have.

        We are so desensitized by the assault on our senses from loud (and
        I don't mean volume-wise) music, clothes, television, games, that
        we don't know how to have pure fun anymore.  The more of this
        worldly crust we chip away from ourselves, the more we can really
        begin to enjoy life and keep our presence of mind and spirit in
        trials.  A Japanese lady once described American food to me as,
        "all salt and pepper."  My tongue was so desensitized, I thought
        her food was bland.  The less "salt and pepper" food I ate, the
        more I came to enjoy the richness and subtlety of flavor in her
        food.

        Those who are called to the ministry of Holy music must always be
        careful that God gets the glory, not the minister.  Contemporary
        musical genres are designed specifically to give glory to man and
	appeal to his baser nature.  As stated, drums and base alone do not
	profane music, it is their pre-eminence in the music, the
	presence of self-glorifying soloists stomping all over the
	dominant beat with improvisational chaos, and "vocal artists"
	revelling in fleshly sensuality on top of all of this that makes
	this stuff unGodly.

        Let's take JP Souza's music for an example.  Played properly, I see
        nothing wrong with it, as secular music goes.  However, imagine it
        played disrespecfully, distorted by exaggerated pounding and notes
        outside of the flavor of the piece based on whatever whim the
        soloist has.  I pray you would not find this enjoyable.

        God is not the author of confusion.  Satan is the master of
        counterfeits.  This so-called "contemporary Christian music" is a
        counterfeit.  It is spiritual junk food.  

        Brothers and sisters, please let us consider removing the excesses
        from our lives that we may be able to taste and enjoy the sublime.
        The quiet that comes into our lives enables us to more easily hear
        the footfall of the enemy as he approaches, that he will not catch
        us unawares in revelry.  Personal Holiness is essential in doing
        battle with the enemy and being Christ's ambassador here on earth,
        as a testimony to the lost.

	Peace,
		Tony
	

    Mike [?] Heiser,
    
    Your passion for music is showing... :-)
    
    As I read what you have written in the last two notes, I wonder to
    myself, how much justification I can come up with, for something that I
    am passionate about, even tho' it may not glorify God.  For instance, I
    can come up with lots of reasons why something that I like isn't sin,
    just cause I like it...  doesn't mean its not sin.
    
    All of the rationalizing of past songs and lyrics that were originally
    written for pubs and are now national anthems, just doesn't hold water
    for me, [okay pick up your chin and I'll explain].
    
    It's association...  if when I heard the song To God Be The Glory and
    associated it to Pink Floyd's Stairway to Heaven, then I'd be
    hardpressed to find any ministering to my soul by that song.
    
    While, I understand your words and intent, I cannot agree that *all*
    music can be made holy...  I have a line drawn and perhaps that is to
    personal taste, but my children who have not been exposed to anything
    more then Twila Paris, says that commercials depicting rock-n-roll, rap
    or even some country, *hurts* their ears.  That is on their own, a
    reaction from the innocence of youth. [Mom has not declared it so]
    and believe you me, Dad who is a Santana fan hasn't either.  But my
    kids cannot stand Santana.
    
    It's amazing we condition ourselves to things and want to declare it
    righteous [myself included].  Not saying this is your plight Mike, just
    observing how impossible it is to get Christian's to really separate
    themselves from worldly things... sigh [another topic, last version]
    
    Nancy
    

>    It's association...  if when I heard the song To God Be The Glory and
>    associated it to Pink Floyd's Stairway to Heaven, then I'd be
>    hardpressed to find any ministering to my soul by that song.
    
    I'm with ya, Nancy.  I remember at one time the "pop" thing was to sing
    "Amazing Grace" to the tune of "The House of the Rising Sun".  I
    thought then (and still do), YUUUCKK.
    
    Mark L.

>>>	  This so-called "contemporary Christian music" is a
>>>	  counterfeit.  It is spiritual junk food.  

        Please allow me to clarify before the flames catch up.  I meant to
        say,

        Much of "Contemporary Christian music" is a counterfeit.
        Counterfeit Christian music is spiritual junk food.  

        That which I have heard of Twila Paris and Phil Keaggy (sp?), I
        have enjoyed.  

	Tony

>        Much of "Contemporary Christian music" is a counterfeit.
>        Counterfeit Christian music is spiritual junk food.  
>
>        That which I have heard of Twila Paris and Phil Keaggy (sp?), I
>        have enjoyed.  

So Twila and Phil are okay, but [someone else's "Christian" music] is not?
Is there an approved list of Contemporary Christian Music that is validated
by the Holy Spirit?  I'm not trying to be pushy, NOR relativistic, and
I recognize Nancy's effort to emphasize *personal conviction* but that's
not what I feel is coming from the right.  (And I like to think I'm middle
of the road, and can be comforted when both the left and right can take 
their shots at me.)

Can we declare black velvet paintings immoral?  (Well maybe.  I mean, 
not, though I don't particularly like them.)

How about hot pink, or blinding yellow?  Perhaps we can outlaw some
types of colors as given to unseemly representations (art).

Yes, there is evil music and yes there is good music, but as Mike points
out, the music is MADE evil or good.   And I disagree with Nancy and Markel.  
We may not like singing gospel hymns to songs we know to have been used
for evil, but SO WERE THE HYMNS WE KNOW when they were evil BAR ROOM DITTYS.
Back then, I can imagine people clicking their tongues are the likes of Luther
for profaning sacred prose by applying bar room melodies to it!  You are
the people of Luther's time!  Can't you see that?

Again, there are lots I don't like.

My father's church is on the campus of Eastern Nazarene College, but it
is also (and primarily) a community church, and so they have a HUGE mix 
in the congregation, between students, intellectual professors, professional
workers, and blue collar laborers, the whole gammit.  And the special music
from such a group is varied.  My father adopted the policy in music to
"offend everyone equally."  So the student picks up the mic and sings
to a recorded tape, and the old lady gets behind the pulpit to sing an
old song, and the choir sings Luther to Gaither, and maybe more, and the
band comes in and sing a Rhythm and Blues hymn, and the Morning Star Baptist
(black gospel) choir raises the roof with their lovely voices, and the Cellist
plays an instrumental, and a lone guitarist sings a ballad about God...
Holiness is God's business and we need to take our cues from Him.
If God tells youto avoid certain things, AVOID THEM, and share with us
why God has told *YOU* to avoid them.  But don't presume in matters of
music, painting, or other expression that there is one expression only.
There is one holiness, and MANY expressions of that holiness.

    Markem... this won't be the last thing we disagree on, Bro... but just
    so folks know, it doesn't change the fact that I love and respect you
    as a Brother in Christ and value you greatly.
    
    It's okay to disagree, folks, because each of us represents a unique
    part of the body of Christ [no pot shots MARKEM] :-)
    
    Love in Him,
    Nancy

	Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,
	nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of
	the scornful.  For his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in
	his law doth he meditate day and night.

	Psalm 1:1-2

>>So Twila and Phil are okay, but [someone else's "Christian" music] is not?
>>Is there an approved list of Contemporary Christian Music that is validated
>>by the Holy Spirit?

        I'm sorry, brother, if I've offended you, but please don't mock.  
        From what I heard, Phil's music is instrumental acoustic guitar,
        pastoral in nature.  Twila's music was soft, reverent, though I
        thought she got a bit breathy (sensual) from time to time.

	Throughout scripture, we are admonished to separate from the things
	of the world and worldliness.  Please reconsider Psalm 1.

	The questions we must ask concerning music are:

	1. How does the music measure up to the scriptural principles of
	   holiness and separation?

	2. Does it encourage us to grow in the Lord?

	3. To whom does the glory go?

	Holy music is a ministry.  The ministration of Holy music should
	take care that all the glory goes to God, and none to the
	performer.  Performances replete with smoke pots and incendiaries
	look more like they come from the "other place."  People twisting
	their bodies in sensual revelry do not have the appearance of
	godliness, regardless of their objective.  Music in which the
	lyrics and melody take a back seat to the rhythm and
	instrumentalists does not lend itself to godliness.

	Tony
	

>>>So Twila and Phil are okay, but [someone else's "Christian" music] is not?
>>>Is there an approved list of Contemporary Christian Music that is validated
>>>by the Holy Spirit?
>
>        I'm sorry, brother, if I've offended you, but please don't mock.  

I was neither offended nor was I mocking.  It was a serious question,
albeit rhetorical.

>	The questions we must ask concerning music are:
>
>	1. How does the music measure up to the scriptural principles of
>	   holiness and separation?

   ...and just as valid, how does it negate the scriptural principles?

>	2. Does it encourage us to grow in the Lord?

   ...does it discourage growth in the Lord?

>	3. To whom does the glory go?

If not to God, then it is vain.  But the mere mention of whole types of
music are not the cause to call them evil as you have done.  As was stated,
the cobbler who makes a shoe, glorifies God with his talent, *EVEN IF*
he will not do so with his tongue.  How much more someone who gives God
the glory for their Christian Rock and Roll (realizing that you find this
term inconsistent).

>	Holy music is a ministry.  The ministration of Holy music should
>	take care that all the glory goes to God, and none to the
>	performer.  Performances replete with smoke pots and incendiaries
>	look more like they come from the "other place."  People twisting
>	their bodies in sensual revelry do not have the appearance of
>	godliness, regardless of their objective.  Music in which the
>	lyrics and melody take a back seat to the rhythm and
>	instrumentalists does not lend itself to godliness.

Let me speak a moment about worship.  Worship is not something performed
by others for you and me to observe and approve or disapprove; it is
something you and I MUST participate in for it to be worship.  We must
actively worship.  The music you describe above are closer to the dark
side of the gray where it is easier to see that performance is put above
praise, but this is not so with ALL CHRISTIAN Rockers.  At least, I will
not make that proclamation (not having heard much in the Contemporary
Christian Music arena myself; would you like a list of the things I have
in my tape drawer?).

Some of the Amy Grant tunes I've listened to I would consider solemnly
written, even with their face paced delivery.  (I don't have to like
every song a writer makes either, by the way.)  Holy music is NOT LIMITED
to that of the pipe organ and piano (in fact some religious organizations
eschew all instrumentation and would look dolefully on some of the
organ hymns we cherish).

Some of the rock and roll (or pop) Christian tunes meet the criteria you set
out.  But I think you might disagree with this.  Maybe we have different
music in mind from experience?  Who knows.

Mark

>The music you describe above are closer to the dark
>side of the gray where it is easier to see that performance is put above
>praise, but this is not so with ALL CHRISTIAN Rockers.

Permit me to comment on my own words:

I have known people who sing solemn hymns in church where the spirit was
just plain flat.  And conversely others who could not sing as beautifully
whose spirit electrified the place.

It's not in the performer.  You are RIGHT to point out that the glory 
goes to God!  When it doesn't, it is FLAT (and I don't mean tonally).
When it does, we are all lifted by the Spirit because we also participate
in the song; its a function of corporate worship and corporate praise.

I have seen some "shows" that left me flat in just about any musical 
style, and I have also seen people's lives transformed in a small church
in the 70s that played Jesus Rock and Roll to a packed house of street
vermin.  There was an old man (now deceased this past year or so, but he
was in his 70s then) who was right there praying people through at the
altar.  His jargon scared a couple of kids ("Are you ready to leave this old
world behind?" he would ask.)  Walter MacPherson probably didn't like Rock
and Roll one bit, but he loved Jesus and was there when punks, vermin, hippies,
drug users, and the like piled in to hear the gospel preached in between and 
during Rock and Roll medleys.

Do you know my Jesus?  [clap clap]
He's a friend of mine!  [clap clap]
Do you know my Jesus?  [clap clap]
He love me all the time!  [clap clap]

I'm a fool for Jesus!   [clap clap]
Whose fool are you? [clap clap]
I'm in love with Jesus! [clap clap]
Jesus love you too!   
Yeah, Jesus loves you too.
  {enter the rock and roll riffs}

-----------------------------------------------
I don't know why Jesus loved me.
I don't know why he cared.
I don;t know why Jesus sacrificed His life,
Oh but I gald! So glad he did!

The Milford Church of the Nazarene saw at least one man turn from
theif to ordained minister of the gospel (Charlie Rizzo).  He's got
to be in his 40's now, still a minister.  Don't know if he still
plays in the band, but he's onthe forefront saving lives from kids
who have no hope and would never darken the door of a Cathedral.

Mark

    Well if he's a Phil Keaggy fan, Tony must be okay then ;-)  
    
    As a Christian musician, and one who almost made CCM his main
    occupation (where's Brad and Steve when you need them?), I simply
    cannot support, nor take seriously, what Tony feels convicted of.
    I have been a part of CCM ministries that have yielded lots of fruit 
    for God, and know in my heart that it's right.  We always gave God the
    glory in all things and made sure audiences were more than aware of
    that.  Anytime a ministry is successful, you're guaranteed to come
    under spiritual attack.  We were always well aware of this and our time
    spent in prayer and worship definitely yielded spiritual growth.  I've 
    made my position known and will leave it at that.
    
    A few nits however:
    
    - Pink Floyd didn't do "Stairway...", Led Zeppelin did.
    
    >    I'm sorry, brother, if I've offended you, but please don't mock.  
>        From what I heard, Phil's music is instrumental acoustic guitar,
>        pastoral in nature.  Twila's music was soft, reverent, though I
>        thought she got a bit breathy (sensual) from time to time.
    
    Tony, you're in for a real shock if you think all Phil does is acoustic
    instrumentals.  Of his 18 albums, only 1 is 100% dedicated to that format.
    
    Mike

    .36
      hee hee hee
    
    Okay Led Zeppelin.. It's been a *long* time since I've listened to any
    music but Christian.. hee hee hee
    
    But actually, I have problem pleading ignorance in this ... hee hee hee
    
    Sorry,
    Nancy
    
    P.S.  The reason I find this so humorous is at one time, slept, ate and
    breathed rock music!  
    
    

        Mark, I just read note 73.  What you bring to light there is so
        true.  As Christians, we must grow holy and separate from the world
        unto Christ.  This is not an easy walk in the flesh, and there is
        little room for compromise.  Please consider applying the
        principals you espouse in 73 to music.  We must learn to discern
        between music that tugs subliminally at our flesh and music that is
        Godly in nature, not just intent.  It is not enough to intend good,
        we must do good as good is described in scripture.  

>>> -< I'm only looking for balance >-

        This is good!  Please read "Music in the Balance" by Frank Garlock. 
        It will help you to understand the nature of this battlefront with
	copious exegesis.

        For the brother that was involved with CCM, please take no offense,
        but God will get the glory in spite of the vehicles we choose for
        expression.  Think of how much greater would be our ministries if
        we would make them holier.  How much more we can be used of God the
        less we compromise with the world.  

        Would you drink from a cup that was dirty?  When you reach for a
        tool from the toolbox, don't you avoid the dirty ones, unless
        there's nothing else?  Let us aspire to be cleaner tools, holier
        persons, each day. 

	Jesus was able to amaze the people of his time, not by stooping to
	use their methods to bring the gospel, but to maintain his decorum
	and comportment as God incarnate, Holy and separate from the world
	system of things.  They wanted to make Him political king, their
	method, and lead a rebellion against Rome, their method again.  He
	rightly refused.

	Let us refuse the world's methods for the sake of holiness.

	Tony
		

Friend Tony,
  You presume that the cup is dirty, which is the contention, no?
I would also think that what cups you see as dirty are not so,
and perhaps things in your life, I might consider "less holy"
than the things of which I am convicted, though I cannot substantiate
this because I do not know you.
  I do not view the rock and roll church as "stooping" to their methods,
but rather using a tool (that is neither clean nor dirty) for a clean purpose.
The world may use the tool (music) for unclean purposes, but it 
does not negate our using the tool (music) for clean purposes or glorifying God.

Mark

P.S. Interesting thought about "holier".  There is one verse in the
Bible with this word and it is used in reference to the people of
Israel who provoke God to anger, to wit (in verse 5; the rest for context):

Isaiah 65:1  I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them
that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not
called by my name.
  2  I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which
walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts;
  3  A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that
sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick;
  4  Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat
swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels;
  5  Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than
thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.

We must be careful to be holy and sanctified, set apart for God's use.
Being holier is not possible; remember, all we do is rags in God's sight.
We can only be obedient; doing what He says and MOT MORE, nor less.

Just a side-thought.

Mark

    Just scanning through; thought I'd submit a verse for consideration:

	To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted
	and do not believe, nothing is pure.  In fact, both their minds and
	consciences are corrupted.
		-- Titus 1:15, NIV

    In Christ,

				*** Daryl ***

150:1  Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the
 firmament of his power.

150:2  Praise him for his mighty acts: praise him according to his excellent
 greatness.

150:3  Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: praise him with the psaltery
 and harp.

150:4  Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed
 instruments and organs.

150:5  Praise him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding
 cymbals.

150:6  Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD.

    I noticed your personal name... :-) :-) :-)
    
    Nancy

        It is good that you are provoked.  However, I detect an element of
        scorn and derision in some of these responses.  Some may even be
	accusational, to wit:

>>        To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted
>>        and do not believe, nothing is pure.  In fact, both their minds and
>>        consciences are corrupted. -- Titus 1:15, NIV

	Let's take this verse in context, starting at 1:9.

        1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he
        may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the
        gainsayers.

        1:10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers,
        specially they of the circumcision:

        1:11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses,
        teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.

        1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The
        Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.

        1:13 This witness is true.  Wherefore, rebuke them sharply, that
        they may be sound in the faith.

	1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men that
	turn from the truth.

	1:15 Unto the pure, all things are pure: but unto them that are
	defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and
	conscience is defiled.

        1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him,
        being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work
        reprobate.

        Does this verse, in context, really mean that if you're saved you
        can worship God any way you want, do anything that "feels good"? 
        That anything you pray over becomes holy by association with you? 
        Isn't that what the World of the Lost says?  Can you pray over that
        cigarrette or bottle of Jack and make it holy?
	
	Please, brothers and sisters, see what God has to say in His word
	about the things of the world that appeal to the flesh.  The normal
	reaction of a body to Rock music is for the pelvis to gyrate.  This
	music aims below the belt.  JP Souza marches tend to make the hands
	and feet move.  There is nothing sensual or sexual aout JP Souza
	marches.

        The difference between David's dance and that of Salome's is like 
        the difference between an Irish Step Dance and a striptease.

	Tony	
					   

>        The difference between David's dance and that of Salome's is like 
>        the difference between an Irish Step Dance and a striptease.

Yes, Tony.  We can surmise this.

But, I went home last night and discussed this note string a little with
my wife.  She asked me a question that I couldn't answer (and I was
preparing to answer as I think you might, as I often do when bouncing
ideas off my wife): "How does he know what type of music God likes?"

I opened my mouth to give a retort, but then shut it again.

Perhaps you have a better answer than I did.

(I have another reply but will save it for the next note.)

John 13
  6  Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou
wash my feet?
  7  Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but
thou shalt know hereafter.
  8  Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him,
If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.
  9  Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands
and my head.
 10  Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet,
but is clean every whit: and ye are clean,...
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Permit me to paraphrase:

  "Hold on, Jesus.  You're not washing MY feet."
  "If I don't, you can't be part of me."
  "Well, then wash all of me."
  "Let's not go overboard, Peter.  Wash only what is dirty."

Sometimes in our zeal for cleanliness, we can "wash the clean parts" (just
to be safe, or to be "more clean").  My mother-in-law is one such compulsive 
who, every week, dusts the basebaords and the ceilings of a four bedroom home 
that she and her husband occupy, in addition to the other ritual cleanings 
she does.

Jesus says, if you're clean, then you don't need a washing.  To put it another
way, there is an axiom that goes like this: "Don't throw the baby out with the
bathwater."

Peace,

Mark

I'm not totally sure where I stand on this one, but....

I don't think the comparison to some of the famous old hymns being originally
bar tunes is really an apt comparison to the complaints about hard rock music.  
The complaint about hard rock is not so much what it has been previously used
for, but what it sounds like as music, in and of itself.  With those old hymns,
the music happened to have been used in a bar song, but listening to it with no 
preconceived notions about what it had been used for, you'd have no way to tell.
For example, if someone from another country, who spoke another language, heard 
the music, what would be the impression of the MUSIC ITSELF?

Think of listening to chinese or indian music when going to a restaurant.
Though I don't understand that music at all, and though I may associate it with
eastern religions or new ageism, the music itself is rather soothing, and I 
could easily picture it being used as a medium for some very positive songs.

In judging rock music as a medium, try to imagine that you're from another
culture, that you don't understand the language, and you have no associations
linking the music with any philosophies or messages.  What would be your 
reaction to it then?  I think that the prior reply about the experiments on
animal's response to music was dealing with exactly this concept.

There's plenty of kinds of music that falls under the category "rock" that I
think would be generate a generally favorable impression.  There's not a real
big step from some of the swing bands of the 40's and 50's and a lot of rock and
roll, and a lot of that music just makes me feel lively.  The feel of the music
is an expression of life and exuberance, and God is certainly a part of that.

But in a lot of harder rock, the dominant theme that I feel from the music 
itself - not from any pre-association - is chaos, disorder, harshness.  Our God 
is not a God of chaos but of order, and I don't think that acid rock lends
itself to the portrayal of a God of order.  I imagine that if Satan listens to 
music at all, acid rock is what he listens to, because it very much lends itself
to the portrayal of *his* messages.

That's not to say that it would NEVER be appropriate, but that it would be
appropriate only for certain messages.  I guess that's a big part of what I'm
feeling.  For art to be truly art, it should be unified in message.  When trying
to portray a message of love and adoration of God, certain types of music lend
themselves to that, and others don't.  Songs of love and adoration just 
naturally want to be quiet, peaceful, restful.  Some kinds of rock and roll
really lend themselves to expressing our joy in the Lord and our Jubilation
over the saving work that He has done in our lives.

I think hard rock might lend itself to portrayals of judgement or the 
consequences of sin.  I remember the first time hearing a particular 
Shostakovich quartet I didn't like it at all - it was very discordant and
distasteful.  When I then learned that it was written in lament over the sacking
and destruction of his home and city, it took on a whole new meaning and I came
to really like it.  Not that it ever became a piece that I found soothing, but
art is not just there to express the soothing.  Our life with God is not all
soothing either, it is sometimes trials, sometimes judgement.

But I don't think that hard rock really lends itself - as what it is - to
portraying the love of God, or the joy of our salvation.

Paul

Paul,

>The complaint about hard rock is not so much what it has been previously used
>for, but what it sounds like as music, in and of itself.  With those old hymns,
>the music happened to have been used in a bar song, but listening to it with no 
>preconceived notions about what it had been used for, you'd have no way to tell.
>For example, if someone from another country, who spoke another language, heard 
>the music, what would be the impression of the MUSIC ITSELF?

For starters, you would have to go back 400 years to know if what you say
is true.  The music itself may have been recognized as evil ditties,
even if the words were never heard.  BUT especially since these WERE
profane songs of the day (bar room songs, that is), can you imagine someone
leaning the new lyrics in church with the bar tune going through his head?
Picture putting sacred lyrics to "Schafer is the one beer to have when 
you're having more than one."  Not exactly rock and roll, but in the 60s
it was contemporary and may help you see that this IS a parallel.

We have to remember that UGLY is not UNCLEAN.  We don't have to LIKE 
certain styles, just like we don't have to think Picasso is art.  But
we can't say Piccaso is evil for not painting a human as we perceive a
human to look.  That's what we're doing by throwing the whole of a music
style into the trash bin.

If you can find eastern music soothing, then I have as much right to condemn
you as being unclean for listening to new age or eastern religious things
to the detriment of your soul.  I'm no fan of heavy metal - I hate it.
Can it be used for God's glory?  Perhaps not in my life, but I can't
say that it cannot in someone elses.  Can you?

>But I don't think that hard rock really lends itself - as what it is - to
>portraying the love of God, or the joy of our salvation.

This is a personal opinion (one which I *happen* to share), but I cannot
say this for all persons, especially ones who might be reached for God.

Mark

    Just a thought:
    
    If the inherent appeal of rock is to the physical ("got a good beat,
    easy to dance to"), through its ability to induce particular moods, 
    then what is the music of God's originally chosen.  Listen to the
    traditional Jewish music and tell me that it does not evoke physical
    responses.
    
    I might recommend a book that speaks to this issue.  I don't
    necessarily agree with all that is said, but it does make one think and
    question one's reasons.  The book is "Faux Pearls for Real Swine" by
    Franky Schaeffer (spelling and title may be off a bit).  This is one of
    Francis Schaeffer's children.
    
    Not all things that evoke strong responses are evil.  The point is
    whether or not it is offered in praise.
    
    David
    
    P.S.
    
    I love the Psalty series, even though it uses light rock motifs in the
    music.  It ministers to the child in all of us.
    

I *think* you missed my point, Mark.

I was trying to specifically dissociate the music style from any preconceived
notions of the music, so I don't think your whole first paragraph applies.  I'm
trying, as best I can, to separate any cultural notions about rock music from
the music itself.

And I'm not condemning anyone, I'm just trying to address the question of the
medium itself as *objectively* as I possibly can, apart from the "rock music is
satanic" and "rock music is great" reactions.

Paul

    Tony,

    My response was not at all intended to be accusatory, but rather to
    provoke thought.  What exactly did Paul mean in these verses? In what
    way was God revealed through them?

    I agree with you wholeheartedly that salvation does not give one the
    license to indulge in something just because it "feels good." All
    things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial.

    However, it is not what goes into a man that makes him unclean, but
    rather what comes out, as Jesus said.  And not all things that appeal
    to the flesh are necessarily evil.  If something is a temptation in
    my life, then God has allowed Satan to tempt me (note that God never
    directly tempts anyone, nor can He be tempted) so that an area of
    weakness in my heart may be exposed.  What I choose to do in response
    to that temptation will determine whether I sin or not; it is my
    response that will make me clean or unclean, not the temptation
    itself.  Our sin nature has its roots in our hearts, not in our
    bodies; our bodies are merely temples for whatever god(s) we choose
    to serve, whether it be the Lord Jesus Christ or the god of this
    world and his minions.

    What Titus 1:15 means, in context or otherwise, is that all things
    exist to serve God's purposes, whether they want to or not -- even
    Satan is kept on a leash.  Because we have free will, it is up to us
    whether or not we choose to allow God to draw us closer to Him through
    our trials and temptations or to reject God's love and push Him away
    from us.  Regardless of our choices, His perfect plan will continue to
    unfold.

    You may be convicted that practically all CCM is of Satan because it
    appeals to the flesh.  I respect that opinion but would submit that
    there is such a thing as pleasure in the flesh that honors God.  The
    most obvious example of this is the union between a man and his wife,
    which is perhaps the most pleasurable thing which a human can
    experience, and which very much glorifies God and fulfills His
    purpose in us.  As Christians, we are not to abstain from pleasure in
    the flesh but rather to abstain from all such pleasure that does not
    honor God -- to offer our bodies as living sacrifices to Him.  It is
    the condition of my heart about which God cares, and if I am
    worshipping Him through music which I happen to find pleasurable in
    the flesh, I have not sinned.

    In Christ's love,

				*** Daryl ***

>        The difference between David's dance and that of Salome's is like 
>        the difference between an Irish Step Dance and a striptease.

>>Yes, Tony.  We can surmise this.

	Good.  Then it should be easy to see the difference between
	music that affects the extremities and music that affects the
	pelvic region.  

>>ideas off my wife): "How does he know what type of music God likes?"

        Let me suggest a thorough exegesis on this very topic, "Music in
        the Balance" by Frank Garlock and Kurt Woetzel, published by
        Majesty Music.  But, for starters, ...

	"Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.  And have no fellowship
	with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."
	Ephesians 5:10-11

	"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.  Abstain from all
	appearance of evil."
	I Thessalonians 5:21-22

	"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a
	roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour."

	"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.  If
	any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For
	all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of
	the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of
	the world."
	I John 2:15-16

        We should have a new song after we are saved.  We should shed the
        old music that entrapped a generation.

	"Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old
	things are passed away; behold all things are become new."
	II Corinthians 5:17

	"I will sing a new song unto thee, O God: upon a psaltery and an
	instrument of ten strings will I sing praises unto thee."
	Psalm 144:9

	"Praise ye the Lord.  Sing unto the Lord a new song, and his praise
	in the congregation of the saints."
	Psalm 149:1

	"Sing unto the Lord a new song ..."
	Isaiah 42:10
	
	Using music to reach the lost to come in a later installment ..

	Tony

    I do agree that certain music has it's place...no, I'm not about to
    suggest the trash can for some that I personally don't prefer. :-)
    What I mean is that there are certain hymns that I greatly love which I
    feel are totally inappropriate for certain uses, say, for example, as a
    worship hymn.  As well, there are uses of music (as alluded to in the
    previous reply) as an outreach which could be (IMO) inappropriate in
    certain types of "church meetings".  I think we need to be careful that
    we don't "throw all our eggs into the same basket" (hmm, that sounds
    appropriate this week!) when we talk about "Christian music".
    
    Mark L.

    For what its wroth Paul, I understood exactly the message you were
    portraying.
    
    Thanks, it shows great wisdom.  
    
    Conditioning... as a country we are dessensitized to violence, why?,
    Well TV critics would say because upwards of 80% of shows/movies on TV are
    violent and the public is being desensitized through this medium as
    well as Theatres.
    
    Why not Music????
    
    Nancy

>86.52 Tony C
> Title:  How do I know? The bible tells me so!

The Bible references you use is colored by your opinion and persuasion.

>	Good.  Then it should be easy to see the difference between
>	music that affects the extremities and music that affects the
>	pelvic region.  

I don't know what music affects your pelvic region.  Is it the same music
as that which affect mine (does any afftect mine?)?

You mention things of the world: do you converse of anything in, of, or
about the world?  Then you violate your own thought here.  If you
speak of the local school system, the cereal you had for breakfast, 
whatever (and however this sounds silly), if everything that does not
come out of your mouth in conversation does not somehow tie to 
Jesus directly, then maybe you're too much in this world.  An axiom I
heard goes like this:  "Let us not be so heavenly minded that we are
of no earthly good."  and the converse is true: "Let us not be so
earthly minded as to be of no heavenly good."  Balance.

Sing unto the Lord a new song, could easily mean Petra's "Onward Christian
Soldiers" (the only Contemporary Christian rock song I know, which I
happen to skip on my "Favorite Hymns" CD sung by contemporary Christian
artists.

The point is *you know in your mind what is "darkness, of the world, et 
cetera* but have not conclusively presented fromthe Bible what style of 
music God likes to hear.

Mark

        RE: Note 86.54 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Search Me Oh God" >>>

	Exactly, Nancy.  I expressed the same concern in .27

	Tony
	

    I sing in a contemporary christian music group at my church.  There are
    nine singers and four band members, and we perform music ranging from
    Keith Green to Amy Grant to Petra.  The group was formed to reach out
    to people and to worship God through this medium.  I also believe that 
    unless  music is purely instrumental, the lyrics are of paramount 
    importance. 
    
    Each time Under New Management sings, the church is filled with joy and 
    praise to God.  But our recent Wednesday night program was the clincher
    for me, watching and listening to the children dancing and singing,
    instead of lyrics of sex or violence, in praise of Jesus.
    
    Rebecca    

	RE: .55

	Studies show that Rock Music affects the pelvic region, yours,
        mine, and the animals in the study that Nancy mentioned earlier.
        (Frith "Sound Effects, Youth, Leisure, and the Politics of Rock
        'n'Roll", Allan Bloom "The Closing of the American Mind", etc).  It
        is often described as "visceral" by its afficionati. 
	
        Mark, we know what God means in I John 2:15-16.  There is no need
        to get derisive, e.g. ".. do you converse of anything in,of, or
        about the world?"  God was not talking about casual conversation,
        but behavior, likes, dislikes, the things with which we assosiate
        ourselves, the things that motivate and direct us.  We want to be
        motivated by the things of God, and we need to search His word for
	His description of these things.  

        Rock music is an expression of existential thought.  Existential
        thought can be summed up as, "What may be true for you may not be
        true for me, but what may be true for me may not be true for you." 
        Rock music is relativistic.  Solos are typically pentatonic minor
        played over a major, notes are slurred, vibratoes swell, nothing is
        exactly placed.  All this chaos with a driven anapestic beat.  This
        relativism can surreptitiously affect your thought and behavior.  

	Our God is a God of order.  His balance is all one-sided, towards
	Him.  We should be seeking God's balance.  The only thing relative
	in our Christian walk is the rate at which we grow, the rate at
	which we allow the Holy Spirit to convict and change us.  
	
        I haven't the time to present a more thorough exegesis on the kind
        of music God likes to hear in this forum.  The best I can do is
	suggest reading "Music in the Balance". 

        I am a pitiful, sinful creature.  There are no nail prints in my
        hands.  Please seek God's face in this matter.  I only pray that
        I've been able to provoke and stimulate without alienating or
        hurting anyone.

	Love,
		Tony
	

 Funny, I will listen to *some* Christian rock (and have put away 99% of my
non christian music) but somehow playing it in church and dancing in church 
bothers me.


I can drive and listen to Petra or Phil Keaggy and sing and/or gain new insight

But at church, and most of the time at home, I want to sing/hear hymns.  





Jim

I was going to enter last night, but thought I'd hold my fire ... ;-)

Any music performance consists of up to 3 elements:
	- the original music as written
	- the lyrics (if any)
	- the performance as interpreted

Any of these three can be good, bad or indifferent on their own (quality,
which may be difficult sometimes to differentiate from taste). Or they can
be holy or obscene (a totally different measure).  Or fit or conflict with
the other two (in any combination).  Both for style match and for absolute
quality.  Each is a valid entity.  You can have 'good' all three, but if
they do not match, the result is a flop.  Since early teens, I've *loved*
Beethoven's 6th symphony (pastoral), but recently got a version of it which
turned out to impose on it the conductor's personality instead of what most
conductors find in it. Comparing notes (!) with others, I find that they
agree about this conductor. 
 
I heard of a missionary in Africa, whose son brought out and played
recordings of Christian rock bands (I don't know what ones they were).  The
africans wouldn't come near, because, as they told the missionary, the
rhythms of the records were those they had used explicitly to summon the
evil spirits. 

Music must be the biggest money spinner going as an industry.  We tend to
worship money in western culture, but we part with it heavily for music.  
I believe that this is because it is a *strongly* spiritual communication. 
It speaks to us without us having to admit it...

The spiritual content is what makes it such a suitable vehicle for praise
and worship.  For either side. 

Many people are not so aware of the spiritual dimension in music.  It's
powerful stuff. Words, music, performance.  Each can be holy or obscene. 
Holy words to obscene music can fool many...  Just as dance can be good or 
bad and pure or evil.

OK - so not all hear the spiritual content as distinctly as others.  Those
who are not much affected by music won't see anything significant in music
which moves others to excesses.  It 'might' be all right for them.  I'm not
here to judge.  But I'm not about to compromise.  

btw - Mike, re .42: � -< Psalm 150, no styles mentioned >-
 - there are.  Every line says how to use the music: it says "Praise Him...."
It doesn't bother to mention all the other things you can do with music.  
Creation was made for his glory.  Use it for just that!

And Daryl, re .41 (was it?) - injudicious application of Titus 1:15 can be
rather risky!!!! It could be used to justify any sort of behaviour...  We
have to take it in context, which is distinguishing the behaviour of those
fit to be elders, from those who are rebellious and who seek to undermine
the fellowship. There is a measure of protection for the pure, as in Titus
1:15 (a favorite of mine), but they use discernment with the application of
Psalm 1 - choosing to stay near the LORD and His holiness...  So, I believe
it's important for us to be listening to the LORD over what music we expose
ourselves to, in accordance with 2 Corinthians 10:5. 

It's not just a matter of taste.  Sure there's that in our choice, but our 
choice *should* be from what is pure, not including that which is impure.
My choice of breakfast cereal may not be your choice, but that doesn't mean 
that either of us has strayed into the area of the inedible!

Those who are the LORD's have the Holy Spirit dwelling within, and in 
music, as in all other matters, should be testing what they hear by His 
presence,and the inner witness.  We don't all hear everything the same, 
because we're not all at the same point (and I'm not talking straight lines 
here!); what's ok for one *may* be because they haven't heard something in 
it that the LORD has highlighted to another for whom it's a danger - 
the permutationsa are almost infinite ;-}

One of my sons lent me a tape of his music, so I could check it through.  
Of the pieces on it, I liked about 3, was rather dubious about 1, and found 
the others not to my taste (to varying degrees), but not harmful.  I could 
ok it for him.  Conversely, when I out a tape on in the car to clean out 
some junk noise when we were traveling Monday, I got negative reaction from 
the family taste, not from their spiritual judgement (I hope!;-).

Our responsibility isn't to police each other (though we are to instruct
our children, so that they learn to discern); it's rather to listen to the
LORD for our own responsibility, that we might keep close to Him
individually.   Keeping short accounts in this area, as in every....

Comes back to 2 Corinthians 10:5, which I seem to have used a lot recently... 
but it bears repeating: 
	"take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."


							love
								Andrew

    Tony, are you the same Tony Camuso who used to note in GUITAR notes?
    
>        Does this verse, in context, really mean that if you're saved you
>        can worship God any way you want, do anything that "feels good"? 
>        That anything you pray over becomes holy by association with you? 
>        Isn't that what the World of the Lost says?  Can you pray over that
>        cigarrette or bottle of Jack and make it holy?
    
    You obviously haven't done much ministry work for Jesus Christ.  It
    doesn't feel good at all, in fact it's a huge amount of work.  Any area
    of servanthood is tough.  Hauling hundreds of pounds of gear around
    from church to church, donating your time without asking for
    monetary compensation nor getting any is not anyone's idea of a "feel
    good" time.  Not too mention the hours of preparation put into honing
    the talents the Lord has given you.  People only see what's on stage and 
    think it's all peaches and cream.  As any servant would say, if it wasn't 
    for the love of Christ and the yearning to share his message of salvation 
    and hope, we wouldn't do it.  Seeing people accept Christ as their
    personal saviour is what makes it "feel good."

>My choice of breakfast cereal may not be your choice, but that doesn't mean 
>that either of us has strayed into the area of the inedible!

Is it okay for me to eat Cap'n Crunch?  My healthn food friends would say
no.

>We don't all hear everything the same, 
>because we're not all at the same point (and I'm not talking straight lines 
>here!); what's ok for one *may* be because they haven't heard something in 
>it that the LORD has highlighted to another for whom it's a danger - 
>the permutationsa are almost infinite ;-}

>Our responsibility isn't to police each other (though we are to instruct
>our children, so that they learn to discern); it's rather to listen to the
>LORD for our own responsibility, that we might keep close to Him
>individually.   

This is how I feel about the matter, Andrew, and Tony.  (And Tony, I'm
sorry if I come off to you as derisive, which is not my intention.  Ask
Nancy, who tends towards your side of the argument.)

Mark

Presenting the opposing view to my own note.... :-)

Even if you were to grant my premise in my earlier note, that hard rock music
does not naturally lend itself to glorifying God, that doesn't mean that it 
can't be used to glorify God anyway.

Satan is quite content to work toward the creation of very soothing and peaceful 
sounding songs, using the medium of peaceful music, to work in lyrics that 
glorify him instead of God and thus woo us away from God.  We're less likely to
have our guard up against such songs, since they don't *sound* bad.  But we
could list thousands of songs with nice melodies and pleasing harmonies that
glorify the body or something other than God or Christ.

Might not God do the same thing using hard rock?  By incarnating Himself to
those who like such music, perhaps He can plant some seeds that the listeners
might otherwise reject?

"For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, that I 
might win the more.  To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to
those under the law I became as one under the law - though not being myself 
under the law - that I might win those under the law.  To those outside the law
I became as one outside the law - not being without law toward God but under the
law of Christ - that I might win those outside the law.  To the weak I became
weak, that I might win the weak.  I have become all things to all men, that I
might by all means save some.  I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I
may share in its blessings."				1Cor 9:19-23

Jesus, is the... one God to have, and He also is God's Son.
Jesus, is the... one God to have, and you can't have more than one.
  The most rewarding Savior in this man's world
  For people who are prone to pun (that's me)
Jesus, is the... one God to have, and He also is God's Son.

- sung to the Schafer beer commercial tune.

You might get a better picture of how Luther might have had his
songs received.

| >But I don't think that hard rock really lends itself - as what it is - to
| >portraying the love of God, or the joy of our salvation.

	This reminds me of the time I went to visit our local priest at St.
Joseph's in Berlin armed with rock albums. I played a lot of songs for him.
Songs by Triumph, Y & T and the Hooters are the ones I remember (I knew there
were more, but can't remember what they were). I played each and everyone of
them for Father Bob. He was someone who often listened to many styles of music.
He even brought a Tina Turner song into one of his sermons, but I digress....
Anyway, he said out of all the ones I played the only one he had ever heard of
was a song by the Hooters called, "All you Zombies". It's a song about various
parts of the Bible and a message of open your eyes, it's not too late. He said
he never really listened to it because it sounded like mumbled words. He put on
some music that was more in line with something you would hear in church. He
asked me, "Isn't this much better?" That's when it really hit me. For the two
of us (your milage may vary) it was a generation gap problem. He never listened
to the song by the Hooters because to him it was mumbling. I wouldn't want to
listen to the type of music he was playing because it was boring to me. I then
asked him, "Which type of music do you think kids would be more likely to 
listen to?" He thought for a couple of seconds and said the music I was
listening to. Reason being is it was geared towards a younger audience. So
maybe, just maybe, this might be a good way to target younger people?


Glen

    Re: .47
    
>In judging rock music as a medium, try to imagine that you're from another
>culture, that you don't understand the language, and you have no associations
>linking the music with any philosophies or messages.  What would be your 
>reaction to it then? 
    
    You mean like "Just Over in the Glory Land" and "Rock Around The
    Clock"?
    
>But in a lot of harder rock, the dominant theme that I feel from the music 
>itself - not from any pre-association - is chaos, disorder, harshness.  Our God 
>is not a God of chaos but of order, and I don't think that acid rock lends
>itself to the portrayal of a God of order.  I imagine that if Satan listens to 
>music at all, acid rock is what he listens to, because it very much lends itself
>to the portrayal of *his* messages.
    >
>But I don't think that hard rock really lends itself - as what it is - to
>portraying the love of God, or the joy of our salvation.
    
    Paul, that's not really a fair accusation since you obviously don't
    like that style of music.  It sounds like chaos or noise to you because
    you don't like it.  If you sat down and musically analyzed something from
    Whitecross (for example) you couldn't find melodies more complex and
    organized this side of Beethoven.  
    
    I've been a musician a long time and am also a guitar teacher.  People 
    have no idea how complicated it is to play some of the hard rock music 
    that is out there.  It's also no secret that some artists "borrow" melody 
    lines from the great composers of the Baroque, Classical, and Romantic 
    eras.  Bottomline: hard rock is at least as organized and complex 
    as any other style.
    
    Mike

RE:    <<< Note 86.61 by FRETZ::HEISER "serving Barney at The Roadkill Cafe" >>>

>>    Tony, are you the same Tony Camuso who used to note in GUITAR notes?

	Yes.

        First, I'm afraid that you have taken my reply out of context.

        Second, you don't know what I have or have not done for Jesus. 

        Thirdly, where in scripture is *HOLY* music to be used for
        entertainment or outreach?

        Jesus did not select the lowest common denominator of his day to
        deliver his message.  No circus tricks, no mime, no theatre, no
        mention of any music outreach ministry among the apostles.  In
        fact, he took a much higher literary route, using the devices of
        allegory, metaphor, analogy, and simile.  We call these parables.
        Not all who heard his message understood it.  And some of those who
        understood it got real angry about it.  

	Incidentally, I know what it's like to lug a lot of heavy equipment
	around for little or no remuneration.  The pleasure I got from
	playing was what made it worthwhile to me.  
	
        Peace,
		Tony
		

>I heard of a missionary in Africa, whose son brought out and played
>recordings of Christian rock bands (I don't know what ones they were).  The
>africans wouldn't come near, because, as they told the missionary, the
>rhythms of the records were those they had used explicitly to summon the
>evil spirits. 
    
    Andrew, that story is pure urban legend.  Such fiction ranks right up
    there with the children's stamps laced with LSD, and the dying boy in
    Scotland memo that gets mailed out every year.
    
>btw - Mike, re .42: � -< Psalm 150, no styles mentioned >-
> - there are.  Every line says how to use the music: it says "Praise Him...."
>It doesn't bother to mention all the other things you can do with music.  
>Creation was made for his glory.  Use it for just that!
    
    ...and that's exactly what CCM artists are doing.  I've never heard
    anyone say to praise anyone but God at a Petra (for example) concert.

Re: 86.49 
�    Not all things that evoke strong responses are evil.  The point is
�    whether or not it is offered in praise.

Exactly, David! - surely, being righteous doesn't mean being insipid!  God
is worthy of the most extravagent of praise ... sometimes needing to be in
private (thinking of the more famous David whose extravagance of praise 
was more public than his wife approved of, though God accepted it, rather 
than upholding Michal's judgement).

I've been in meetings where a little delicate 'jigging' was in order, 
because the presence of the LORD was *exciting*.  I could see that it was 
decent and in order (when I paused from my attitude of praise, which was 
focussed on the LORD, and didn't notice anyone else).  At the same time, I 
could see a man whose danceing was rather different.  He'd brought 
something of the world in, and it was rather unsuitable, but really, we 
were too intent on the LORD to worry about that.  The LORD could speak to 
him about it if necessary (maybe using one of his elders)...


							love
								Andrew

>        Jesus did not select the lowest common denominator of his day to
>        deliver his message.  No circus tricks, no mime, no theatre, no
>        mention of any music outreach ministry among the apostles.

Matthew 9:6  But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to
forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy
bed, and go unto thine house.

Mark 2:10  But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to
forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,)

Luke 5:24  But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to
forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise,
and take up thy couch, and go into thine house.

  He did perform miracles to bolster faith in Him.  Or should I say that
Jesus PERFORMED miracles.  Oh, He did it for God's glory, as should anyone
who performs.

  Ever been to a piano or pipe organ recital?  I have.  The man, or woman,
was performing.  In the case of a sacred concert God was glorified directly.
In a secular concert, God was glorified through the Boston Pops, and
the Thomas Jefferson Junior High School band.

-----------------------

Now tagging onto .69 (Andrew Yuille), my father's church was once criticized
by a young woman (as it was being built) for the chandelier in its foyer,
which was a waste of money when the money could have been [better] used 
to feed the poor.  I am reminded of three things:  the offerings for
the Tabernacle (where people were restrained from giving), the extravagance
of Solomon's temple, and the words of Judas when the woman anointed Jesus 
for burial.  When something is SPENT on God, it should be our best.

Mark

Hi Mike, 

Why do you dismiss the misssionary record as legend?

�> - there are.  Every line says how to use the music: it says "Praise Him...."
�>It doesn't bother to mention all the other things you can do with music.  
�>Creation was made for his glory.  Use it for just that!
�    ...and that's exactly what CCM artists are doing.  I've never heard
�    anyone say to praise anyone but God at a Petra (for example) concert.

Good!!  I don't know Petra.  Heard of them, but not heard them (to know). 
That one example doesn't mean that all concerts praise God.... 

My point isn't even what the words say.  It's that the Psalm exhorts us to
use the music (as well as the words) to praise God.

late here - I'll have to be away very soon.

							Andrew

Hi Paul, 

Agreed, satan can work as effectively through the soft-and-soothing syrup
as he can through the hard impact.

He masqueradeas as an angel of light, as well as parading as a roaring 
lion....

						Andrew

�>>    Tony, are you the same Tony Camuso who used to note in GUITAR notes?
�      Yes.
    
    Well then, I know for a fact that you played in rock bands.  Did you
    become a Christian and suddenly decide that all rock is evil?  A lot of
    rock musicians struggle with this after being saved.  Mylon LeFevre and
    Glenn Kaiser did, and so did I.  We are called to use whatever talents
    God has given us to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

>        Second, you don't know what I have or have not done for Jesus. 
    
    The same applies to all Christian musicians out there.  You can't
    condemn the whole lot in one broad stroke just because you can't accept
    Christians playing rock.  Every member of Mylon LeFevre & Broken Heart
    is an ordained minister.  Glenn Kaiser and John Herrin of REZ Band are
    ordained ministers and serve as 2 of the 9 pastors that shepherd the
    JPUSA community in Chicago.  Sheila Walsh of the 700 Club has said,
    "Glenn and Wendy Kaiser are some of the holiest people I've ever met. 
    All Christians could stand to learn from them."  That's just the tip of
    the proverbial iceberg and I doubt you know all of what CCM artists
    have done for Jesus Christ.

>        Thirdly, where in scripture is *HOLY* music to be used for
>        entertainment or outreach?
    
    It happens in churches around the world every Sunday.  Christians
    everywhere use the talents that God has given them to minister to the
    body of Christ and to reach the lost.

>	Incidentally, I know what it's like to lug a lot of heavy equipment
>	around for little or no remuneration.  The pleasure I got from
>	playing was what made it worthwhile to me.  
	
    I realize that now after finally remembering where I'd seen your name
    before.  Do you ever play for the Lord?
    
    Mike

>Why do you dismiss the misssionary record as legend?
    
    Because I've heard too many missionaries, ministers, and artists
    dismiss it as a hoax.  
    
>Good!!  I don't know Petra.  Heard of them, but not heard them (to know). 
>That one example doesn't mean that all concerts praise God.... 
    
    True, but I've been to see hundreds of today's artists and the ones
    that "flesh out" are in the extreme minority.
    
    Mike

    Slight digression -- more slight than others in this topic... :-)

    Andrew,

    In the taking of Titus 1:15 out of context, I agree with you in part.
    By all means, one must be very careful when doing so; it can only be
    done safely as led by the Holy Spirit and when it still fits within
    the context of the Bible as a whole.  This is necessary to avoid
    misapplications, which as you pointed out could be used to justify
    any sort of behavior.

    And I also totally agree that we should listen to the Lord with
    respect to the music to which He would have us listen -- even (and
    especially) if His instruction is painful.  As it happens, He's pruned
    me of a great many things for which I had great fondness, even
    recently, and this does happen to include music.  Some of the things
    which He had me surrender were incredibly painful to give up, but by
    His grace it was accomplished.  And He's still working on me in this
    area, and this will probably continue for the rest of my life, in one
    form or other.

    But with respect to limiting Titus 1:15 (and surrounding verses) to
    its context (the choosing of elders), while I agree that it is
    important to understand the nuances of this context as well as
    possible, I maintain that the principle it expresses is more general
    in nature, and that this is pretty much the same with the Bible as a
    whole (as you probably know).  That is, the entirety of the Bible,
    both Old and New Testaments, contains both general principles and
    examples of their application, the latter (for example) laid out
    explicitly, as in the epistles, or by example as in the relating of
    excerpts from the lives of those mentioned in the historical books.
    It is, of course, the timeless nature of these general principles
    which makes the Bible every bit as applicable to life today (in all
    cultures) as it was throughout the period it was written.

    This has the effect of making the Bible its very own context, and so
    when I occasionally pull a verse out of the context in which it was
    originally written, I try to insure that the application of the verse
    remains in the context of the Spirit of the Bible as a whole.  As I
    say, this can only be done safely by the Holy Spirit Himself, Who
    originally wrote the Bible, and Who leads us into all Truth today as
    we increasingly endeavor to apply it to our lives.

    For what it's worth, and in His love,

				*** Daryl ***

>>    The same applies to all Christian musicians out there.  You can't
>>    condemn the whole lot in one broad stroke just because you can't accept
>>    Christians playing rock.

        I pray that I have not brought into question the motives of those
        involved in CCM.  It is the medium of Rock 'n' Roll that I
        question.  I don't want to take the word of a TV personality as to
        the holiness of this one or that one.  Holiness must be measured
        against what the Word of God says.  I know that I don't measure up
        very well. 

        I didn't suddenly decide that all rock is evil when I became a
        Christian.  It just didn't feel right anymore.  I asked my pastor,
        and he suggested some Bible verses and prayer to help me sort it
        out.  My wife is a musician also, got saved the same day I did, and
        had the same questions.  She took a bible course on Music and the
        Church and shared what she learned with me.

        Jesus bore our sins for us on the cross.  He gave everything up so
        that we wouldn't have to burn in a devil's hell for all eternity,
        which is the only "right" we have, the only thing we truly
        "deserve."  We are such spoiled little children in this country,
        wanting to hold onto whatever we did in our former unsaved lives. 
        There are trials coming to this country.  There is judgement
        coming.  We will not be comfortable and spoiled for much longer. 
        We had better be ready.  

        We should avidly and fervently seek His face and search His word
        for those things that bring Him pleasure.  When we find them, we
        should be more than willing to do them.  When we find that which
        displeases Him, we should be more than willing to give it up.  To
        my shame, I am no record-breaker in either of these endeavors.

>        Thirdly, where in scripture is *HOLY* music to be used for
>        entertainment or outreach?
    
>>    It happens in churches around the world every Sunday.  Christians
>>    everywhere use the talents that God has given them to minister to the
>>    body of Christ and to reach the lost.

	I asked for exegetical corroboration.  From what I've read, sacred
	music was performed in worship, never for the lost.  If the
	assembly is entertained, it should be a second-order result, not a
	first-order consideration.

>>    I realize that now after finally remembering where I'd seen your name
>>    before.  Do you ever play for the Lord?
    
        Yes, I do.  I've sold all my electric stuff, after much hand-
	wringing and soul-searching and prayer.  I've learned to play 
	finger-style many of the classic hymns and praises from our church
	hymnal, and some of the more contemporary songs from the Majesty
	Music series, and I sing in the choir.

	Blessings to you,

	Tony

    Tony, thanks for the background info.  It helps me understand your
    point of view.
    
>        I pray that I have not brought into question the motives of those
>        involved in CCM.  It is the medium of Rock 'n' Roll that I
>        question.  
    
    I realize you didn't intend to question CCM artists, but by questioning
    their medium, that's exactly what you have done.
    
    >I don't want to take the word of a TV personality as to
>        the holiness of this one or that one.  Holiness must be measured
>        against what the Word of God says.  I know that I don't measure up
>        very well. 
    
    Well none of us do, but the point is that those artists are well
    respected in Christian circles, and are considered to be the original
    hard rock Christian band.  God has blessed them mightily and they have
    grown to be great warriors for the Lord.

>        I didn't suddenly decide that all rock is evil when I became a
>        Christian.  It just didn't feel right anymore.  I asked my pastor,
    
    The Holy Spirit is constantly convicting us of things in our lives, but
    He doesn't blanketly convict us of the same things.  God deals with us
    all differently in areas of our lives.
    
>	I asked for exegetical corroboration.  From what I've read, sacred
>	music was performed in worship, never for the lost.  If the
>	assembly is entertained, it should be a second-order result, not a
>	first-order consideration.
    
    Sacred music is performed in worship, but one never knows when the
    unsaved are present in the church.  Worship ministers to the believer's
    spirit by drawing us closer to Him.  It will also touch the unsaved 
    that are present.

    It's great to hear of your decision for Christ,
    Mike

         RE:       <<< Note 86.81 by LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits" >>>

>>>        question.  I don't want to take the word of a TV personality as to

        Please forgive me for this contemptuous, thinly-veiled slur.  Like
        I said, I don't measure up to holiness very well, myself.

	However, holiness must still be measured against what the Word of
	God says, not what people say.

	Tony

>>>    hard rock Christian band.  

        I'm sorry, but this strikes me as a contradiction in terms.  If I
        didn't know any better, I'd think it was an intentional non-
        sequiter promulgated by a Saturday Night TV comedy scoffer.

        Mike, I don't question the *motives* of those that use Rock 'n'
        Roll, the visceral, gut-wrenching, hit-below-the-belt, hip-twisting
        music of rebellion and left-wing, (insert a barrage of politically
        incorrect references here) groups, but I question their
        *discernment*.

        God does use the tools available.  It's just that we should aspire
        to be better (holier, more separated) tools.  Jesus was able to win
        the lost without trickery or showmanship.  He took the high road
        with great success.  His miracles were not meant to be showy, they
        were performed out of compassion and love and always at the
        discretion of the Holy Spirit.  "A wicked and adulterous generation
        seeketh a sign."

        In fact only one of the ten lepers even returned to thank Him for
	their cleansing.  Not all who were the subjects of his miracles
	were saved.  I don't have the verse, but there is one that says we
	are saved by hearing and by hearing the Word of God. 
	
	Though we don't agree on this, I'm still glad that we're brothers,
	covered by the blood, and glory-bound!  There's no disappointment
	in Heaven!

	Amen,
		Tony
	

Replies 86.70, .73, .75 .76 .78 have been moved to chit-chat note 14, as 
they constituted a light hearted aside.

The culprits consider themselves warned ;-)

							Andrew
						     co-moderator

Hi Daryl,

�    But with respect to limiting Titus 1:15 (and surrounding verses) to
�    its context (the choosing of elders), while I agree that it is
�    important to understand the nuances of this context as well as
�    possible, I maintain that the principle it expresses is more general

Agreed - I was just pointing out that this is the sort of character to look 
for in seeking eldership candidates, rather than saying every Christian is 
guaranteed pure-minded whatever the temptation.

It's place for each of us to be in, before the LORD, rather than a safety
net which turns everything into 'good' regardless. 


� especially) if His instruction is painful.
Interesting one.  I find that if the LORD is telling me something, it has a
sense of being welcome to my heart, even if the thing itself would be
unwelcome.  When it's the enemy, a syrupy-smooth 'encouragment' tastes
sick, and revolts me, while a 'stop!' comes like a vicious threat, which is
false.  For the LORD to say "Time to cut this out", about something which
I'd held precious, is like a welcome awakening to a closer degree of walk.
Though putting it into effect might not be quite so easy always ;-} 

"The LORD disciplines those He loves..."  Hebrews 12:6
- this life is the learning / growing process which prepares us for
eternity with Him.  When we stop learning and growing, it's either time to 
worry, or time and worry have ceased!


						God bless
							  Andrew

RE: <<< Note 86.63 by EVMS::PAULKM::WEISS "Trade freedom for security-lose both" >>>
                 -< "...that I might by all means save some." >-

>>Might not God do the same thing using hard rock?  By incarnating Himself to
>>those who like such music, perhaps He can plant some seeds that the listeners
>>might otherwise reject?

	The use of 1Co 9:19 in this context is misleading.  The implication
	is. "To the rocker, I became a rocker."  Can we extend that to "To
	the scoffer, I became a scoffer?"  Does "To the Jew, I became a
	Jew," mean that Paul was exhorting us to be circumcised to help win
	our Jewish neighbors to Christ?  In Paul's words, "God forbid."
	What he means here, is to seek common ground with all, but *WITHIN*
	the bounds of holiness and separation prescribed throughout
	scripture and *WITHOUT* compromise.

        "So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of
	God."
        Romans 10:17 

	And how much of the word of God can you hear over a driving beat,
	blaring instruments, and sensual or in-your-face-rebellious vocals?
	How much of the actual Word of God is in this music, anyway? 

	Peace,
		Tony
		

RE:      <<< Note 86.64 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>
                    -< in 400 years, this might be a hymn >-

>>You might get a better picture of how Luther might have had his
>>songs received.

        This is absurd and smacks of irreverent parody.  Please, provide
        for us conclusive evidence that the music of "A Mighty Fortress"
        was a saloon chanty in its day.  I heard that Luther had ripped it
        off one of his classical composer contemporaries.

        There was an article I read in "Perilous Times" that published some
        of Luther's racist writings concerning Black people.  Alas, his
        judgement was subject to folly, as is ours, and using a bawdy
	saloon chanty as a vehicle for worship shows bad judgement.

	Tony
	

	One last thing.  One of the notes, I forgot which one, mentioned a
	cute little motto that goes something like this, "Let's not be so
	heavenly minded that we are of no earthly good, and not so earthly
	minded that we are of no heavenly good."

        This is unscriptural.  The preponderance of scripture tells us that
        we are never heavenly minded enough, that we should strive to be
        more heavenly minded every moment of our lives, and the more
        heavenly minded we are, the more God can use us to do His work on
        earth.  Cute little ditties like that one are surreptitious
        invitations to wink at sin and compromise and to grow complacent in
        our walk.  We should always seek to be growing closer to the Lord,
        not seeking some "balance" (i.e. compromise) with the world.

        We should be seeking the conviction of the Holy Spirit in the
        scriptures as an instrument to change and shape us ever more in
        God's image, instead of justification for our weaknesses and love
        for the things of this world. 

        I'm glad that the prophets and especially God-incarnate Jesus,
        sought no balances or compromises.

	God's balance is one-sided, all for Him.
        Man's balance is compromise.  
	
	Peace,
		Tony
			

RE: RE:             -< in 400 years, this might be a hymn >-

>>>>You might get a better picture of how Luther might have had his
>>>>songs received.

>>This is absurd and smacks of irreverent parody.

	Those are very strong words.  Are you sure?

>>Please, provide for us conclusive evidence that the music of
>>"A Mighty Fortress" was a saloon chanty in its day.  I heard that
>>Luther had ripped it off one of his classical composer contemporaries.

	I was the one who originally mentioned it.  I keep a lot of
	"recyclable material" like that lying around in my head.  But I
	usually forget where it comes from.  I'll make every effort to find
	a conclusive reference to this story.

>>There was an article I read in "Perilous Times" that published some
>>of Luther's racist writings concerning Black people.

	Circa 1540?  In that age, they had a *few* problems with ethnic
	diversity.  I don't think Luther was alone.  He just had kind of
	a knack for writing what was on his mind.

>>Alas, his judgement was subject to folly, as is ours, and using a bawdy
>>saloon chanty as a vehicle for worship shows bad judgement.

	Question:  (Not exclusively for you Tony)

	If indeed the song originated in the taverns, should we strike
	it from our hymnals today?

	Rick

     <<< Note 86.90 by PIDA::UNX14::kennell "Richard Kennell, ESTG CAD" >>>

>>>	Those are very strong words.  Are you sure?

	Using the Schaeffer Beer commercial to promote Christ is just the
	type of thing the masters of irreverent TV parody would do for
	laughs.  I did not mean any disrespect for brother Mark, and
	apologize if my remarks were construed as such.

>>	Circa 1540?  In that age, they had a *few* problems with ethnic
>>	diversity.  I don't think Luther was alone.  He just had kind of
>>	a knack for writing what was on his mind.

        True enough, but it shows disregard for scripture.  Read what
        happened when Miriam murmered against Moses' Ethiopian (Black)
        wife.

>>	If indeed the song originated in the taverns, should we strike
>>	it from our hymnals today?

        Good question, indeed Rick.  However, the music to "A Mighty
        Fortress" is, in and of itself, inocuous.  Rock music is not.  It
        is intrinsically harmful.

        Does the music to "A Mighty Fortress" evoke in us visions of
        barroom revelry?  I don't think it does.  Does Rock 'n' Roll convey
        subliminal messages of rebellion, relativism, and sexuality?
        Studies show it does.  (Fishman and Katsh, "The Music Within You",
        Richard S. Taylor, "The Disciplined Lifestyle", Dr. John Diamond,
        "Your Body Doesn't Lie", et al).

        If the music to "A Mighty Fortress" was associated with debauchery
        in its day, then Martin Luther made a bad judgement call.

.89>

Even more strong words, Tony, for you have taken my words out of their
intended meaning and context.  The BALANCE I have strived for is the balance
between LEGALISTIC points of view (now there's a stronger set of words)
and that of a anything-goes.  Because legalism, which is how I view your
position, is as deadly as any other ism.

How Great Thou Art - Swedish folk medoly
How firm a foundation - Early American melody
All creatures of our God an king - Melody from Geistliche Kirchengesang
Sun of my soul - adaptation from Katholisches Gensangbuch
Immortal Invisible - Welsh melody
I heard the voice of Jesus say - old english air
Guide me, O thou great Jehovah - Welsh hymn melody
Praise Ye the Lord, the Almighty - "Stralsund Gesangbuch" 
       from "Praxis Pietatis Melica"
We gather together - folk song of the Netherlands
O Word of God incarnate - Meiningisches Gesangbuch
Fairest Lord Jesus - from "Schlesische Volkslieder

These from leafing through the first 100 songs of our churches hymnbook.
Some of these tunes borrowed, may be from orchestrationsfor sacred music
(I don't read German).  Some of these are from *the World* wih their
folk melodies.

>>>You might get a better picture of how Luther might have had his
>>>songs received.
>
>        This is absurd and smacks of irreverent parody. 

You *THINK* so.  I may not have done a good job at writing the words,
as Luther, but THE SAME thing occurred 400 years ago when (if) he penned
his words to beer hall ditties.  THEY found it absurd, no doubt, that we today
find sublime. 

Mark

	From what I've been taught, Legalism teaches that salvation is of
	works through obedience to the law.  This is not my position, nor
	that of the church I attend.  Let's peruse what the scripture has
	to say about the Laws of God.  The last verse in this list has
	something to say about our relationship to the world.

        Romans 3:31 
        Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid:  yea, we
        establish the law.

        Romans 6:2 
        God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer
        therein?

        Romans 6:15 
        What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but
        under grace? God forbid.

        Romans 7:7 
        What shall we say then? [Is] the law sin? God forbid.  Nay, I had
        not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except
        the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

        Romans 7:13 
        Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But
        sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which
        is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding
        sinful.

        1 Corinthians 6:15 
        Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ?  shall I
        then take the members of Christ, and make [them] the members of an
        harlot? God forbid.

        Galatians 2:16-17

        Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but
        by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus
        Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not
        by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no
        flesh be justified.  But if, while we seek to be justified by
        Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, [is] therefore Christ
        the minister of sin? God forbid.

        Galatians 6:14 

        But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord
        Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto
        the world.

>>You *THINK* so.  I may not have done a good job at writing the words,
>>as Luther, but THE SAME thing occurred 400 years ago when (if) he penned
>>his words to beer hall ditties.  THEY found it absurd, no doubt, that we today
>>find sublime.

        Folk music stripped of its words is generally harmless, rock music,
        irrespective of the words is not, ever.  Forgive me for repetition,
        but allow me to quote from .91

>>	If indeed the song originated in the taverns, should we strike
>>	it from our hymnals today?

<        Does the music to "A Mighty Fortress" evoke in us visions of
<        barroom revelry?  I don't think it does.  Does Rock 'n' Roll convey
<        subliminal messages of rebellion, relativism, and sexuality?
<        Studies show it does.  (Fishman and Katsh, "The Music Within You",
<        Richard S. Taylor, "The Disciplined Lifestyle", Dr. John Diamond,
<        "Your Body Doesn't Lie", et al).
<
<        If the music to "A Mighty Fortress" was associated with debauchery
<        in its day, then Martin Luther made a bad judgement call.

	All of us are capable of making bad judgement calls.  We must
	continuously search God's Word 	for guidance, to divide what's
	questionable from what contributes to greater growth.

	Tony

	Speaking of bad judgement calls, I am guilty of a few this morning,
	in that some felt personally attacked by my remarks.  Please
	forgive me for any indiscreet choice of language.
	
	My intent is not to paint anyone as a compromiser, but to debunk
	the philosophy of compromise with the world, however subtle.  The
        Bible is unrelenting in its exposure of compromise, and the
	doctrines thereof, as the soup that slowly cooks the frog, one
	degree at a time, until he is cooked.

        Consider this.  When we are saved, we get a new nature, but we
        retain the old sin nature.  Does our old sin nature improve?  Nope.
        It continues to sink ever lower, so that, if we do fall, the
        results would be as catastrophic, in our earthly lives, as if we had
        continued in our old sin lives.  In alcohol and drug treatment,
	they call this the "Progression of the Disease."  

	Peace,
		Tony
		

    
    *If* any should believe that Christians should take up a vehicle of
    worship towards satan, something born in rebellion and drugs,
    prominiscuity and sadomasochism (yes I believe that is where rock was
    birthed), turn it around and claim it for worshiping God, believing
    it's an acceptable sacrifice, I offer the following food for thought:
    
    	"Ahaz sent messengers to say to Tiglath-Pilesar king of Assyria,
    	`I am your servant and vassal.  Come up and save me out of the hand
    	of the king of Aram and of the king of Israel, who are attacking
    	me'.  And Ahaz took the silver and gold found in the temple of
    	the LORD and in the treasuries of the royal palace and sent it as a
    	gift to the king of Assyria."  II Kings 16:7-8  NIV
    
    	"Then Ahaz went to Damascus to meet Tiglath-Pilesar king of
    	Assyria.  He saw an altar in Damascus and sent to Uriah the
    	priest a sketch of the altar, with detailed plans for its
    	construction.  So Uriah the priest built an altar in accordance
    	with all the plans that King Ahaz has sent from Damascus and
    	finished it before King Ahaz returned.  When the king came back
    	from Damascus and saw the altar, he approached it and presented
    	offerings on it... The bronze altar that stood before the LORD
    	he brought from the front of the temple - from between the new
    	altar and the temple of the LORD - and put it on the north side
    	of the new altar."  II Kings 16:10-14  NIV
    
    	"King Ahaz took away the side panels and removed the basins
    	from the movable stand.  He removed the Sea from the bronze
    	bulls that supported it and set it on a stone base.  He took
    	away the Sabbath canopy that had been built at the temple
    	and removed the royal entryway outside the temple of the LORD,
        in deference to the King of Assyria."  II King 16:17-18
    
    
    Ahaz found this beautiful heathen altar attractive.  Yes, it was
    used to worship other gods, but why not take this vehicle of worship,
    copy it - but sacrifice to the LORD upon it.  Something that was used
    for satan -- he'll offer it to God instead.  Won't the LORD be pleased!
    
    Not only that, but he'd re-do the altar of the LORD - change it around
    a bit to more suit the look with this new altar.  Holy standards were
    brought down and rearranged.  He mixed the worship, standards, and
    sacrifices of other gods with the worship of the LORD, thereby
    corrupting it.
    
    Do you suppose this compromised worship was acceptable to the LORD?
    Do you believe He was pleased with this new altar in the same room with
    His sacred altar?  Do you suppose he accepted the worship Ahaz
    sacrificed upon the copied heathen altar?
    
    
    So you know where I stand on this issue.  I have listened to various
    rock groups and most scrape at the eardrums of my soul.  I just
    cannot picture countless saints in white sadomachist robes offering
    screaming guitar riffs to our LORD, crying Holy Holy Holy.  Why not?
    Because of the ill-at-ease, non-peaceful, non-holy feeling I get when
    I hear this music being sacrificed to the One I love.
    
    ) <----  Flame on, but it'll only hit my shield!  :^)
    
     
                                       

    The most complete Scriptural discussion of legalism of which I am aware
    is Colossians 2:6-23.

    In His love,

				*** Daryl ***

    It would probably be best if I retracted my reference to Titus 1:15,
    since I don't seem to be able to convey my original intent for its
    inclusion in a way that others might find helpful here.  It wasn't
    intended to either condone or condemn rock music, but rather to
    show that it is the condition of our hearts which is important
    to God.  My intent was to focus attention not on the temptations of
    this world but rather on the sin in our hearts which can lead us to
    give in to those temptations.

    In His love,

				*** Daryl ***

    
    Hi Tony,
    
    
    > Consider this.  When we are saved, we get a new nature, but we
    >  retain the old sin nature.  Does our old sin nature improve? Nope.
    >  It continues to sink ever lower, so that, if we do fall, the
    >  results would be as catastrophic, in our earthly lives, as if we had
    >  continued in our old sin lives.  In alcohol and drug treatment,
    
    	I dont understand this. How does our sin nature "sink ever
     lower" if we are wholly committed to God?? The more we grow and mature
    in God the less the hold of our tendancies towards the sin nature.  We
    still have to make choices but theyu are more in tune to what God would
    have us do.  If we are constantly engaging the "sinful nature" then
    where is the victory in Jesus???  Our old nature is put away, Praise
    God! Behold all things have become New.  I am no longer a prisioner of
    my "old nature", only my choice  NOT to acknowledge God in all my
    ways is what seperates me from communion with Him.
    
     Dan

    
>>    	I dont understand this. How does our sin nature "sink ever
>>     lower" if we are wholly committed to God?? The more we grow and mature
>>    in God the less the hold of our tendancies towards the sin nature.

        True.  The new nature grows and matures as long as we continue to
        allow the Holy Spirit to work in our lives.  However, the old
        nature, which remains till the day we die, continues to progress in
        its decay, even though we are not engaged therewith.  What I was
        trying to say is, if we turn from God, whether by degrees or of a
        sudden, we are likely to be capable of sin we wouldn't have done in
        our pre-salvation lives.  For example, When I was a child, I
        remember saying, "Wow, I'll *NEVER* do dope!"

	I don't know if this is absolute, and I will try to provide
	exegesis tomorrow.  If I cannot, I will retract.
	
	Tony
	

	RE:		<<< Note 86.96 by STOWOA::WERBER >>>
                         -< Another of the "minority" >-
	Amen!!
    
	Tony

RE:   <<< Note 86.97 by EVMS::GLEASON "The Word of God is living and active!" >>>
                                 -< legalism >-

	I confess to being vain and puffed-up from time to time %^), but in
	Collossians 2:6-23, Paul is talking of the ordinances of men, not
	the Law of God.  We can apply this today to the overblown rules and
	regulations promulgated by the Department of This and the Ministry
	of That in our governments and organized religions.

        The Jewish law had three distinct branches.

	1. National law, ministry of the govt knows what's best for you.
        2. Ceremonial law, fullfilled by the sacrifice of Jesus. (*Glory!*)
	3. Moral law.

        We are no longer bound to the National law or the ceremonial law.
        However, the Word of God is clear that we are bound to the moral
        law.  Our behaviour and relationship to worldly pleasures comes
        under the moral law.

	Tony	

	RE:      <<< Note 86.102 by LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits" >>>
                      -< Law_of_God != Ordinances_of_Men >-

        Permit me to comment on my own entry.

>>	We are no longer bound to the National law or the ceremonial law.

	By this, I mean the ancient Hebrew National Laws of the bible.  We
	must still obey the laws of whatever land we live in, insofar as
	they don't interfere with our relationship to God (see Daniel).

>>        However, the Word of God is clear that we are bound to the moral
>>        law.  Our behaviour and relationship to worldly pleasures comes
>>        under the moral law.

        You still can't marry your sister, or commit adultury, or
        participate in any of the ungodly things of this world.  One of our
        our responsibilities is to search the scriptures learn what God
        considers ungodly. 

	Psalm 1:1
	"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,
	nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the
	scornful."

	Lord, help us to be able to live this verse.  Amen.

	Tony

>	I confess to being vain and puffed-up from time to time %^), but in
>	Collossians 2:6-23, Paul is talking of the ordinances of men, not
>	the Law of God.

You have provided NO SCRIPTURAL BASIS, even though you have provided scripture,
to support the idea that rock and roll music (without lyrics) is of the devil.
I contend that you ARE putting on an ordinance of man, saying that we should
not listen to rock and roll whether by Christians with Christian lyrics,
or by secular artists with love songs, or by the base with the profane.
You make no distinctions and merely point at "rock and roll" as being inherently
evil.  That is a supremely SUBJECTIVE viewpoint.

Colossians 2:16  says, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, 
or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:"

Yet you would judge.

I have never had a drop of liquor, nor alcohol (if you exclude Nyquil cough
syrup).  Yet, I do not condemn those who drink wine with their meal.

I don't like sounds that offend my ears (such as does happen with some
rock and roll); but I don't condemn all because of my offense taken.
I have seen the fruit of "Rock and Roll Ministry," no matter how dichotomous
you may feel that phrase is, and rigidly refuse to believe that people
have been saved through it.  But perhaps you don't but only believe that
God is not glorified nor pleased with it.  Again, you provide NOTHING in
all the scriptures you have given that tell us the style of music God likes
to hear, but you certainly know which style He doesn't.

I can judge adultery and say it is wrong; I cannot have a personal conviction
  to the contrary.
I can judge murder and say it is wrong; I cannot have a personal conviction
  to the contrary.
I cannot judge Picasso as wrong for painting the human body with an eye 
  here and an eye there (chaos, no?).  I can have a conviction that all
  art must be painted as true to life as possible.
I cannot judge some classical music composers who have put together what
  sounds to ME like chaos.  I can have the conviction that music must have
  meters of 3/4 and 4/4 time with major and minor chords.
I cannot judge someone who drinks wine, in the sacrament of communion,
  or in the privacy of their home.  I can have the conviction (which I do)
  that to abstain is better.

I cannot place my convictions onto another, nor can I make my conviction
a moral code of the Holy Spirit, (which is what I see you attempting to do).

Mark
 

        Mark, I have listed scriptures that deal with standards of
        holiness, separation, the setting apart of Christians as God's
        "peculiar people."  I have listed references by knowledgeable
        people, secular and Christian, who have done studies on rock 'n'
        roll showing that it erodes moral judgement.  I have asked for
        exegetical evidence that holy music can be used primarily for
        entertainment (the key word here is PRIMARILY), and have seen none.  

        Please try re-reading these with a tender heart and an open mind. I
        know that I have not acted in love in a lot of things that I have
        said, and ask your forgiveness, and that of God for any offence any
        have felt.  The scriptures, however, are God's love letters to us.
	They speak better than any of us ever could.  I believe that people
	get saved in any circumstance where the conviction of the Holy
	Spirit has moved them to submit and surrender to Christ.

        But, I'm sure you don't want anything to tamper with your
        childrens' moral judgement.  I believe that God shows us in
        scripture He feels the same way towards us.  Please at least give
        an ear to what those who have studied its effects say about
        the rock 'n' roll medium.  Then judge if it is suitable as an
        offering to a Thrice Holy God.

	Peace,
		Tony
	

    
    I would say exactly what Mark said in .104 if I had the ability.  
    
    To debate endlessly music, dancing, card games, movies and all of the 
    cultural stuff that people enjoy but have been condemned as bad by 
    religious people over time is an evil distraction.  When Paul had to 
    address these sorts of things he always pointed to God's grace and in 
    that grace, the perfect law of liberty.  Shall we do any less?
    
    jeff

    >I cannot place my convictions onto another, nor can I make my
    >conviction a moral code of the Holy Spirit, (which is what I see 
    >you attempting to do).
    
    Mark,
    
    In your church, there is a moral code by which you live, that is not
    explicit in the Bible, such as NO DANCING.  Why do you not dance?  How
    did you come to the conclusion of obedience of that particular moral
    code without scripture being used?
    
    Nancy
    

>    In your church, there is a moral code by which you live, that is not
>    explicit in the Bible, such as NO DANCING.  Why do you not dance?  How
>    did you come to the conclusion of obedience of that particular moral
>    code without scripture being used?

A good question I will be happy to answer.

The Church of the Nazarene organized as a body of believers, and as such
adopted a set of special rules in addition to the Articles of Faith
(available on request).  To quote from the church manual:

"...The Church of the Nazarene, as an international expression of the
Body of Christ, acknowledged its responsibility to seek ways to particularize
the Christian life so as to lead to a holiness ethic.  The historic ethical
standards of the church are expressed in part in the following items.
They should be followed carefully and conscientiously as guides and helps
to holy living.  Those who violate the conscience of the church do so at
their own peril and to the hurt of the witness of the church.  Culturally
conditioned adaptations shall be referred to and approved by the Board of
General Superintendents."
  "In listing practices to be avoided we recognize that no catalog, however 
inclusive, can hope to encompass all forms of evil throughout the world.  
Therefore it is imperative that our people earnestly seek the aid of the
Spirit in cultivating a sensitivity to evil which transcends the mere
letter of the law; remembering the admonition: "Prove all things; hold
fast that which is good.  Abstain from all appearance of evil" 
[1 Thessalonians 5:21-22]

My summary of special rules (prohibitions):

1. Entertainments which are subversive of the Christian ethic.
    Incidently, my church says to avoid the movie theater because it supports
    an industry or morality.  Do you go to the movies?  Am I holier than Thou?
    (I do not go to the movies.)
2. Lotteries and other forms of gambling.
3. Membership in oath-bound secret orders or societies.
4. All forms of social dancing.
5. The us of intoxicating liquors as a beverage; or trafficking therein.
6. The unprescribed use of [drugs].

It goes on to state the church's stance on abrotion, marriage, etc.

Now, of the six listed above, I do not participate in any of these BECAUSE 
I have chosen to associate myself with a [human] Church organization that
has agreed by membership to adhere to the rules of the church, which 
the corporate body has deemed appropriate (or perhaps the better Christian
witness for) behavior.

The church does NOT condemn those who drink alcohol as a beverage, though
I know some Nazarene's who do.  I wonder if the Church of the Nazarene in
Italy or Spain has this restriction.  Certainly, I know that Scottish 
Nazarene's dance at weddings (perhaps this was dispensed with by
the "cultural sentence" in the manual.

The church does not say which entertainments are subversive, though we
all know that some are! The church does not say ALL entertainments are
subversive, though it nearly does by asking its members not to go
to these entertainments.

Now, you must have a follow-up question...

Mark

    Nancy,
    
    >Why do you not dance?
    
     The history behind this is because the dancing of that time was where
    husbands and wives would dance with other husbands and wives or
    partners.  
    
    Tony,
     
        >I believe that people get saved in any circumstance where the
        > conviction of the Holy Spirit has moved them to submit and
        > surrender to Christ.
    
    I agree with you here,   I also believe that Christian Rock concerts 
    can and are used of the Holy Spirit to bring people to Him.
    	
    You know, the lost and seemingly hopeless are not going to walk right
    into your church building seeking God.  Where ever the Gospel of Christ
    is preached and the salvation message is given, I say Praise God for He
    can accomplish miracles.
    
     Dan

    >Now, of the six listed above, I do not participate in any of these
    >BECAUSE I have chosen to associate myself with a [human] Church org
    >that has agreed by membership to adhere to the rules of the church, which
    >the corporate body has deemed appropriate (or perhaps the better
    >Christian witness for) behavior.
    
    Yes, I have a next question.
    
    Are you obeying because of the church only, or do you believe these to
    be sin based on the scripture you provided to "abstain from all
    appearances of evil."
    
    Nancy

>    Are you obeying because of the church only, or do you believe these to
>    be sin based on the scripture you provided to "abstain from all
>    appearances of evil."

Some of these I obey in deference to the organization to which I belong.
I see nothing wrong with attending some movies and by which I hope to cast
my vote for "proper" entertainment.  I see nothing wrong with spending
a dollar per week on the lottery (though I see MUCH wrong with what gambling
can do), just as I see nothing wrong with a glass of wine but can see MUCH
wrong in what alcohol can do.  As for dancing, how can I answer since I
would be embarrassed to do so, but I know some of my brethren in this 
conference who dance to the Lord in church (a social gathering), and some
who dance socially (square dance, etc; not body slamming).

I believe that my church has adopted a "stricter than necessary" approach
for the sake of others looking on.  And in doing so, it is easy for such
in my church organization to also fall into LEGALISM and PRIDE of action,
and CONDEMNATION of others in and out of Christ.

For those who follow the "rules" for the sake of others truly, it is 
a comendable conviction to abstain from all alcohol to be an encouragement
(or not a discouragement) to others who might be prone to alcoholism
and drunkeness.

I know some attenders of my church who will not join because of these rules,
and I commend them for their conviction not to be false.  I do not condemn
them as unchristian, nor participating in unchristian behavior out of hand.
I would condemn one who joins such an organization as mine as cast aside the
rules as if they were of no consequence.  Joining means adopting the corporate
conviction no matter where our personal convictions lie; we subject the
personal to the corporate, which is subjected to God.

Next?

Mark

        I'm familiar with pride of action.  It's one of my besetting sins.
        But the scripture quoted in .93 on the Law of God still stands, as
        does the scripture on holiness and separation, as does the
        testimony of those who have carefully studied the effects of rock
        music (regardless of the words) on our sense of moral judgement.

        There is no attempt to codify what is not already in scripture, in
        that we are commanded to avoid the things of the world, lust of the
        flesh, lust of the eyes, pride of life, appearances of evil, etc,
        etc.  If something can subliminally erode our sense of moral
        conviction, albeit however slowly, the Word of God instructs us to
        avoid it.  None of you will want to see the subliminal message of
        rebellion intrinsic in rock 'n' roll surfacing in your children,
	your mates, or yourselves.

	Peace
		Tony
	
			

	I guess I'm a bit confused by what's being called Rock and Roll
	here.

	The Beatles were considered Rock and Roll.  Using that as a measuring
	stick, much CCM would be considered Rock and Roll.

	Nancy has made it clear that she has a problem with music where you
	can't understand the lyrics. (I agree).

	How about other dissenters here ?  

	Karen

    It seems to me that what's not being taken into account here is that   
    everyone is different and is in a different place in their walk with
    God.  Some are further along the path than I am and some are not as far
    along, some are seeking the path and some are lost in the woods. It
    sounds as though Tony has received a very clear directive - but it
    I have not received the same message. Now that could mean that Tony is 
    further along than I am, or that my heart is hardened, or it could mean 
    that rock music could be a stumbling block for Tony and that's why he's been
    given that particular conviction, or it could mean....  I've been a 
    Christian since I was a small child and I've been singing in the church 
    since I was small, and I've sung secular classical music in study and with
    various choral programs.  I've never been involved with secular rock music.
    I don't like it, I don't listen to it, I'm not drawn to it, it does nothing
    for me. But I do like Christian rock (I'm not talking hard rock - I haven't
    listened to any that I would term hard rock.)  The message matters.  
    "I believe in God the Father, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus
    Christ His only Son..."    "Blessed is he who will follow the Lord, He
    will not stand in the path of the sinner, he will sit in the seat of
    the scoffer, for the law of the Lord is his delight..."    "Jesus said
    that it couldn't be stopped, Jesus said that it had to be heard, His
    creation will praise Him, Jesus said that we could be assured, if we
    all maintain our silence, even stones will cry out so loud His creation
    will praise Him all alone or in a crowd. In the end every tongue will
    confess, every knee will eventually bow, His creation will praise Him,
    it's so easy to go for it now.  Lord I lift my voice to you and magnify
    your name, you are Alpha and Omega you are every day the same, as long
    as I draw breath my lips will praise you as long as I have strength I
    want to praise your name...."  These are words to Christian rock songs.
    For me, singing and listening to this music is challenging.  It makes me 
    think, and stand for what I believe. I must reiterate that lyrics are  
    of paramount importance. Words, not musical notes are our primary method 
    of communication, and long after the music fades, the words remain. 
    
    We are wonderfully unique, with varied and specially selected gifts to 
    use for His service and glory. I'm not a particularly eloquent speaker, 
    but I've been given a singing voice to use in praise of God and I joy in 
    that, as I believe He intends us to joy in our gifts, and I try to use
    it for His glory. I think contemporary Christian musicians do the same,
    and that they can reach people that may not be reached by other means.
    I'm grateful for our uniqueness and our differences, because He can use
    us all in so many ways to draw and strengthen His children.
    
    Rebecca   
    

I'll take up the challenge, Karen.

Music is a medium, no more, no less.  Beethoven was booed off the stage 
during the premier of his Ninth Symphony.  The audience walked out and 
the orchestra played to a nearly empty house.  His music was criticized 
as being strident, cacophanous and not fit for women and children to 
hear.

As a side note, several instruments that we identify with the modern 
symphony orchesra, such as horns, trombones and bassoons were considered
unacceptable for use in the early 18th century orchestras and many 
composers refused to write for them. (Watch it, Markel!)

I believe God doesn't look at Mike Heiser any better or worse than He 
does Beethoven.  If Mike and his friends can win souls to Christ with 
their music, praise God for them.  They've done more with their guitars 
and drums than I've done with my horn and music degree.


Sandy

    >I believe God doesn't look at Mike Heiser any better or worse than He
    >does Beethoven.  
    
    Sandy, thanks for saying that, and I heartily agree.  If Mike or anyone
    else who plays in R&R band are feeling as though they are being
    personally attacked, then the fruit of this discussion has not yet been
    seen.
    
    The point is not to condemn those persons involved... but to bring
    light into area of darkness [subjective reasoning, I know].  
    
    You know when God convicted me of wearing certain clothing, I wasn't too
    happy about it and I took it personal when my Pastor preached modesty
    to the women in our church.  I spent a lot of money on my clothing and
    by George, I liked it!  I was extremely rebellious about it...  But God
    won and the enemy lost.  
    
    These are sensitive areas and Rebecca makes a good point in saying
    "Where are you on the path?"  
    
    Let's not bring persons or personalities into this discussion, but
    merely bring to the table Scripture, studies, etc., that are objective.
    
    
    >If Mike and his friends can win souls to Christ with
    >their music, praise God for them.  They've done more with their guitars
    >and drums than I've done with my horn and music degree.
    
    Again, I say, Amen!  I can't agree more... 
    
    now... Sandy, about that Horn and Music degree... hmmmm, Didn't I hear
    you say you play your horn at church???? :-) :-) :-)  It's a start
    Sister!
    
    Love you all!
    Nancy

>Some of these I obey in deference to the organization to which I belong.
>I see nothing wrong with attending some movies and by which I hope to cast
>my vote for "proper" entertainment.  I see nothing wrong with spending
>a dollar per week on the lottery (though I see MUCH wrong with what gambling
>can do), just as I see nothing wrong with a glass of wine but can see MUCH
>wrong in what alcohol can do.  As for dancing, how can I answer since I
>would be embarrassed to do so, but I know some of my brethren in this 
>conference who dance to the Lord in church (a social gathering), and some
>who dance socially (square dance, etc; not body slamming).

Based on this answer, I'd say God never really convicted you personally to 
any of the moral standards of your church.  Your conviction as I see it [and 
if I'm wrong, I know you'll tell me] is that the Bible says such and such, so 
I can't argue, but I can say that anything in moderation is okay, because I 
have a *verse* that backs that up.  But because the scripture also talks 
about obedience, I will obey.. because I learned obedience is protection, 
even if I don't agree that I need protection from *that*.

>I believe that my church has adopted a "stricter than necessary" approach
>for the sake of others looking on.  And in doing so, it is easy for such
>in my church organization to also fall into LEGALISM and PRIDE of action,
>and CONDEMNATION of others in and out of Christ.

No-one in this string has CONDEMNED ANYONE... it is very much condemnation of 
unholiness [albeit perceived].  Legalism and pride of action are not the 
issue here, CONVICTION of what is of the World and what is not of the World 
is.

>For those who follow the "rules" for the sake of others truly, it is 
>a comendable conviction to abstain from all alcohol to be an encouragement
>(or not a discouragement) to others who might be prone to alcoholism
>and drunkeness.

Yes, I agree it is commendable.  And I believe God honors this as he says 
explicitly we should not be stumbling blocks to others.

>I know some attenders of my church who will not join because of these rules,
>and I commend them for their conviction not to be false.  I do not condemn
>them as unchristian, nor participating in unchristian behavior out of hand.
>I would condemn one who joins such an organization as mine as cast aside the
>rules as if they were of no consequence.  
>Joining means adopting the corporate conviction no matter where our 
>personal convictions lie; we subject the
>personal to the corporate, which is subjected to God.

BTW, the standards by which your church lives is almost identical to the 
standards by which my church lives.... interesting.

The difference between you and I is that my convictions from the Holy Spirit 
are in direct correlation with the moral standards of my church. Conviction 
does often breed the term "narrow minded". :-)

I'll ask again... since I couldn't really tell what your answer was and I'm 
supposing a lot.

Are you obedient or are you convicted that your church's moral standards are in 
alignment with God's word?

With love,
Nancy

P.S.
    Not answering the dancing question in deference to others; you can
    write me offline... I'd love to know.
    
    

	RE:	<<< Note 86.116 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Search Me Oh God" >>>
                        -< Haven't forgotten you Mark >-

>>    The point is not to condemn those persons involved... but to bring
>>    light into area of darkness [subjective reasoning, I know].

	Precisely.
    
>>    You know when God convicted me of wearing certain clothing, I wasn't too
>>    happy about it and I took it personal when my Pastor preached modesty
>>    to the women in our church.  I spent a lot of money on my clothing and
>>    by George, I liked it!  I was extremely rebellious about it...  But God
>>    won and the enemy lost.

        My wife went through the same changes.  I went through changes
        around my electric instruments.  I managed to hang on to them for
        about 2 years.  That's a lot longer than the time my wife clung to
        her old wardrobe.  I finally sold it all very cheap.  There are
        those who said that I should have given it all away, and others
        that encouraged me to give one last "rock concert" by smashing all
        that equipment together, with the TV.  I believe they were only
        half-kidding! :-}  Funny, the TV broke and I got rid of my electric
        stuff all within a month.  Our home has felt more like a home since
        the death of the TV.
    
>>    These are sensitive areas and Rebecca makes a good point in saying
>>    "Where are you on the path?"

        Exactly!  The only thing relative in our Christian walk is our
        respective rates of growth. 
    
>>    Let's not bring persons or personalities into this discussion, but
>>    merely bring to the table Scripture, studies, etc., that are objective.

	Touche' encore!
    
    >If Mike and his friends can win souls to Christ with
    >their music, praise God for them.  They've done more with their guitars
    >and drums than I've done with my horn and music degree.
    
>>    Again, I say, Amen!  I can't agree more...

        I agree also, but with the qualifiers of discipleship and follow-up
        to promote growth in the Lord and a Holy walk.  And to get that
	rock stuff out of our lives!

	Tony
	

	I may have caused some confusion in my note... I was asking
	those who believe that Rock and Roll is bad to define Rock and Roll.
	(ie, does Carmen play Rock and Roll ?  Does Michael W. Smith ?  Amy
	Grant ?  Petra ?  )

	I was thinking of something the other day in regards to Tony's
	comments about R & R music being "bad" with or without the lyrics
	( a point which I *don't* believe has been proven scripturally here).

	When I was in college, I was a member of a sorority.  We used to
	make up lots of songs, and often were taught "sorority" songs by
	"sisters" from other schools.  I remember one especially irreverent
	ditty we were taught that was sung to the tune of "Oh be careful little
	eyes what you see" (true title escapes me).

	Now, I doubt many of you could find evil in the tune of the song itself.
	The lyrics made all the difference.  

	Tony, I do understand very clearly what you are saying about holy
	things, and that we are not of this world.  I truly don't, however,
	understand your comments about certain music itself being inherrently
	evil (or worldly, or whatever).  

	I guess I'd be an outlier in a graph of people who's pelvis gyrates
	upon hearing rock music.  I may dance, but I don't gyrate ;-)
	(used to,  BC, though... )

    
    >now... Sandy, about that Horn and Music degree... hmmmm, Didn't I hear
    >you say you play your horn at church???? :-) :-) :-)  It's a start
    >Sister!
    
    
Yup, I'm playing on Easter Sunday.  My heart is very different when I 
play, now.  I used to play for all the wrong reasons, i.e. applause, 
compliments, money.  The Lord kept me from playing for almost 10 years 
because of my pride and gave me back my music last year.  Now I play 
only in church or at Christian functions.  I've played with some of the 
finest orchestras in the world and and accepted praise and adulation 
(well, maybe not adulation :^) ) from hundreds of people, but the 
greatest joy I've ever had was several weeks ago when I played an 
uplifting hymn (I think it was "Let Us Worship God Together") and a 
little old lady in a wheelchair in the front row nodded her head in time 
to the music in obvious enjoyment.  I suspect she would have been 
uplifted if I had been blowing my nose instead of my horn because it was 
the music, not the musician or instrument that was important.

I like what Rebecca said about where we are in our walk.  I respect you, 
Tony, for your convictions and we musn't lose sight of the message I 
hear you trying to convey.  Our world is full of evils to be avoided and 
there is much of rock that is evil but not all of it is to be condemned.
Much of Debussy's music is sensuous and Mussoursky's (I never could 
spell his name) "A Night on Bald Mountain" conjours up images of demons 
and spirits but that doesn't prohibit me from enjoying classical music.  
I believe moderation and discernment are the operative words here.

Sandy

    Amen Sandy!!!
    
    It sorta made me a little misty eyed reading about that little ol' lady
    in the wheelchair... that might be me one day! :-)  Head bobbin' like
    those little doggies in the back of cars.. :-)
    
    Nancy

        Our church has been able to minister to young and old alike without
        the benefit of rock concerts.  The prime directive of Music at our
        church is as an offering fit for the Thrice Holy God. The simple
        beauty of melodies and words of thanksgiving, praise, and humility,
        without the encumbrance of the subliminally suggestive and
        overbearing rhythm of the rock idiom has inspired the young and
        old, visitor and member alike.  This edifying of the assembly is a
        result of participation either as observer or performer in a Holy
        act of worship.

        I can't remember having heard any of the children, members, or
        visitors express a wish that the church music ministry had a rock
        venue.  In fact, newcomers like I was once, after seeing the power
        of the simplicity in music that is unburdened by the stigma
        associated with rock, start to seek music styles alternative to
        rock.

        By the way, I have never heard a sermon preached against rock from
        the pulpit.  To be sure, our pastors don't have anything good to
        say about it, but they provide bible readings and books on the topic
	to those who ask about rock in their personal lives.  

	For outreach, we bring the gospel to the doorstep of the folks in
	the neighborhoods, stores, or whenever the Spirit shows us someone
	who expresses an interest in what makes us look and act so
	different.  Testimony and worship are supposed to be 24-hour-a-day,
	in our walk, our talk, our dress, our comportment, "studying to
	show ourselves approved" that we can answer the questions directed
	at us.  I have seen my wife lead a woman to Christ in a playground,
	and have seen the fruit of her testimony for Christ in stores.  

	Bless you all,

		Tony

.117 Nancy
    
>Are you obedient or are you convicted that your church's moral standards are in 
>alignment with God's word?
    
    Both.  But also, that one who may have a drink is not out of alignment
    with God's Word. That one who dances (in a proper way - and I'm not
    defining it) is not out of alignment, even if I am unwilling to become 
    what my conviction says is a stumbling block.
    
    You see, I am unwilling to allow another to be a stumbling block to me.
    I know there is freedom in Christ; all things are permissible, even
    though not all things are beneficial.  When I step over the line of
    saying that I am convicted of this good and YOU SHOULD BE TOO, then I
    have usurped the authority of the Holy Spirit.
    
    More as I finish the string to catch up.  I'm on .117.

    Anybody know where the term "rock 'n' roll" came from?
    
    :-)

>	And how much of the word of God can you hear over a driving beat,
>	blaring instruments, and sensual or in-your-face-rebellious vocals?
>	How much of the actual Word of God is in this music, anyway? 
    
    Does this mean you're condemning Christian rock without ever listening
    to any of it?

    >    Our church has been able to minister to young and old alike without
    >    the benefit of rock concerts.  The prime directive of Music at our
    
     I know a church that has ministered to [mostly] young and old
    WITH the benefit of rock music.
    
   > The prime directive of Music at our church is as an offering fit for
   > the Thrice Holy God
    
     I believe the music played was an offering fit for God.
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    What Sandy and Rebecca have said ring true.  Rock and Roll music is
    just another expression of music to be used (or abused).
    
    It is mathematical organization of tonal sound which is faster
    (sometimes) then classical, louder (often) than an broadway show tune,
    with a more pronounced beat (sometimes) than some love ballad.
    It uses guitar instead of pipe organ, drums for cadence like a marching
    band, keyboard for other effects.
    
    It is music.  It is not evil music UNLESS evil is applied to it!
    
    People can carry convictions to an extreme. Christian Scientists will
    not take precription drugs.  They believe in the Great Physician.  Are
    they holier than you or I for taking tylenol of a headache?  Is your
    faith so small as to not believe the Lord will heal you if it is His
    will to do so, without benefit of man's [God-given] technology?
    This is the same type of argument being made against a STYLE of music.
    
    Holy living is touted, and abuses of a style of music is cited (while
    other styles and their abuses are not condemned).  If you don't agree
    with Tony's and Nancy's conviction, then you are not spiritually
    enlightened and blinded to the truth; unable because of the immarture
    walk.  (All inferred, I'll grant.)  Tony has provided IMPLICATIONS
    of Scripture only.  He has inferred from them what is the truth about
    this style of metered tonal groupings.  And he has passed the benefit
    of his conviction onto us all.  But instead of merely stating that his
    is the conviction he has come to, it goes beyond the personal into the
    general: all rock and roll is of the devil.  I strongly oppose this
    statement.  (Can you tell?)
    
    But perhaps Rebecca's question has been overlooked.  Can you define
    Rock and Roll?  When does the symphony orchestra stray tonally into
    this area of evil music.  The Boston Pops can do some swinging tunes,
    you know that might put rock and roll to shame for its sensuality.
    
    And i do not believe I got an answer to the question: How do we know
    what music God likes?  I got a bunch of Scripture and a load of implied
    opinion on that Scripture to support a view, but I got NO SCRIPTURE
    SURE GROUND of an answer.
    
    Mark
    
    
    

	RE:      <<< Note 86.123 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>

	Is it usurping the authority of the Holy Spirit to expose danger?
	Where does exhorting let off and usurping begin?

        I reiterate, please read the testimony of those secular and
        Christian researchers who have studied the effects and dangers of
        rock music.  I have listed at least five different sources.  Why do
        you refuse to give ear to those who would identify danger in our
        lives and our respective Christian walks?  Why do you take umbrage
        when verses are presented that espouse holiness and freedom from
        the penalty of the moral law, but not freedom from obedience to it? 
        Why do you take this personally, as if someone were pointing a
        finger at you and saying, "Bad"?  

	Peace, and a blessed paschal,
	
		Tony
			

    Re: .96
    
    Isn't God the Creator of all things?  Isn't Satan the
    Counterfeiter/Distortionist of all things that are good?

Tony, for what it's worth, you tastes and mine are very similar.  I 
prefer old style hymns to much of the contempory Christian music that 
I've heard but that's only a matter of personal preference.  My church 
uses a bass guitar as part of the worship team but I wouldn't call it 
rock, yet many of those who perform in my church sing contempory songs.  
I like the mix between contempory and traditional as it gives everyone a 
chance worship in whatever style they prefer.

Sandy

               <<< Note 86.127 by LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits" >>>

>	Is it usurping the authority of the Holy Spirit to expose danger?
    
    Not at all.  Danger is one thing.  Warn a person not to use rock and
    roll music for purposes that do not glorify God.  Wanr a person to use
    rock and roll as a vehicle to glorify God.
    
>	Where does exhorting let off and usurping begin?

    When one begins to codify what is permitted and what is prohibited that
    which is not expressly stated in the Bible.  Inferrence on the
    principle of a matter is fine but should be carefully labelled as such.
    
>        I reiterate, please read the testimony of those secular and
>        Christian researchers who have studied the effects and dangers of
>        rock music.  
    
    Please re-read the testimonies of people who have been saved through a
    rock and roll ministry.  I'll bet I can find more of these testimonies
    that notes in a Mozart score.
    
    >   Why do you refuse to give ear to those who would identify danger in our
    >    lives and our respective Christian walks?  
    
    I have a suspicion that you think you know the reason.  Why do you
    refuse to give ear to the testimonies of people who have used Rock and
    Roll to the documentable glory of God?
    
    
    >Why do you take umbrage when verses are presented that espouse
    >holiness and freedom from the penalty of the moral law, but not freedom
    >from obedience to it?  
    
    Because the verses you have supplied do not say anything about Rock and
    Roll music being a sinful expression of music.  You want to talk about
    holy living, and I can do that for hours and hours.  I don't see rock
    and roll music as part of it pro or con.  I DO see INSTANCES of rock
    and roll on both the Pro and Con sides.
    
    >Why do you take this personally, as if someone were pointing a finger
    >at you and saying, "Bad"?  
    
    If I listen to rock and roll, (and I occasionally do, depending on your
    definition - then maybe I don't).  You are saying that I am
    participating in something unholy.  Your conviction is fine and is not
    in concert with mine.  You cannot see how our two convictions can be
    from the same God, right?  He's told you it is wrong, so to contradict
    that is to contradict God.  You can lighten the blow to me by calling
    me blinded or immature in my walk but it boils down to the same, does
    it not?
    
    I believe that what is sin for you is sin for me if it is sin for God.
    Sin to God is explicitly spelled out in the Bible.  I believe also that
    there can be a sin for you that might not be a sin for me.  Do you
    think this is possible in any circumstance?
    
    Mark
    

>        I agree also, but with the qualifiers of discipleship and follow-up
>        to promote growth in the Lord and a Holy walk.  And to get that
>	rock stuff out of our lives!
    
    Our home church provides counselors, including the band, for all those
    accepting the invitation.  The same group of people perform the
    follow-ups.  The Lord has blessed all involved and those that decide to
    come to our church receive a solid grounding in the Word.

>Much of Debussy's music is sensuous and Mussoursky's (I never could 
>spell his name) "A Night on Bald Mountain" conjours up images of demons 
>and spirits but that doesn't prohibit me from enjoying classical music.  
>I believe moderation and discernment are the operative words here.
    
    That's Modest Mussorgsky.  I'm not affected that way by his music. 
    Especially "Pictures at an Exhibition."

    I like Pictures at an exhibition, and I liked Night on Bald mountain
    until I saw Fantasia.  Of course, I liked the Hobbit until Rankin and
    Bass mutilated my image of Bilbo Baggins.
                                                                   
    MM

>        I can't remember having heard any of the children, members, or
>        visitors express a wish that the church music ministry had a rock
>        venue.  In fact, newcomers like I was once, after seeing the power
>        of the simplicity in music that is unburdened by the stigma
>        associated with rock, start to seek music styles alternative to
>        rock.
    
    No, they wait until they get home to crank up the Petra. ;-)
    
    Have you tried this approach for street ministries (i.e., playing in
    public city parks, state/town/county fairs, etc.)?

    >Re: .96
    
    >    Isn't God the Creator of all things?  Isn't Satan the
    >    Counterfeiter/Distortionist of all things that are good?
    
    God created music, Satan most definitely distorted this music through
    the rhythms and methods used in a lot of rock music... sigh.
    
    Mike, I wrote you offline to let you know that I hold no ill feelings
    towards anyone that doesn't agree with the conviction around music that
    I have and I meant it... 
    
    I made a statement that anything that distorts the lyrics is not good
    music to be listening to even if it is deemed Christian.  I still
    believe that there are some great artists that do not distort the music
    and some would still consider it evil music.. I'm not one of those.
    
    I believe that there are some very good CCM out there, much along the
    lines of the Pop/Folk/Gospel kind.  I remember the first time I
    listened to Twila Paris and sat with tears streaming down my face, with
    uplifted hands in the middle of my living room floor, asking God to
    minister to my heart through this song, I remember when Susan Ashton
    sang Grand Canyon and when the words, "And I've let it turn as cold as
    a stone" choke me up, so that while was frying chicken, I couldn't see
    which pieces to turn over.  
    
    Discernment folks, discernment that we need to ask does this music,
    touch my heart in a real way, or just evoke a reaction that is prompted
    through rhythm and beats... sigh
    
    Rock is intrisically bad, it is distorted music of God's... How do you
    take something that has been distorted and make it good?  I dunno,
    don't think it can be done.  At least not the kind I'm talking about.
    
    The ends doesn't justify the means, an age-old adage.
    
    Love in Him,
    Nancy

    
    
    
    
    >Rock and Roll?  When does the symphony orchestra stray tonally into
    >this area of evil music.  The Boston Pops can do some swinging tunes,
    >you know that might put rock and roll to shame for its sensuality.
    

Anything by Webern or Berg. :^)

Come to think of it, I did a concert with the Pops and Neil Diamond back 
some time ago.  His backup band did some serious geetar stuff.  Then 
again, I did a concert with Roberta Peters where she sang "Ave Maria" 
and "O Divine Redeemer".  I wouldn't classify the Boston Pops as either 
a religious organization or a rock band based on either of those 
performances.

Sandy

    
    
    

    >Rock is intrisically bad, it is distorted music of God's... How do you
    >take something that has been distorted and make it good?  I dunno,
    >don't think it can be done.  At least not the kind I'm talking about.
    
    Rock is not intrinsically bad.  
    
    Rock music is intrinsically devoid of value.  The value one places on
    it is bad or good.
    
    Mark

>        I reiterate, please read the testimony of those secular and
>        Christian researchers who have studied the effects and dangers of
>        rock music.  I have listed at least five different sources.  Why do
>        you refuse to give ear to those who would identify danger in our
>        lives and our respective Christian walks?  
    
    I've read books like this in the past and they're typically very
    non-objective witchhunters with an axe to grind against rock because it
    doesn't tickle their fancy.  How OBJECTIVE are YOUR sources?
    
>        Why do you take this personally, as if someone were pointing a
>        finger at you and saying, "Bad"?  
    
    Because when people say things like what you've been saying, you're
    implying that our work for the Lord, His saving of souls, His touching
    lives, is in vain.

          <<< Note 86.133 by FRETZ::HEISER "nothing but the blood" >>>
                                   -< fwiw >-

>>Much of Debussy's music is sensuous and Mussoursky's (I never could 
>>spell his name) "A Night on Bald Mountain" conjours up images of demons 
>>and spirits but that doesn't prohibit me from enjoying classical music.  
>>I believe moderation and discernment are the operative words here.
    
    >That's Modest Mussorgsky.  I'm not affected that way by his music. 
    >Especially "Pictures at an Exhibition."

Many people are though, Mike.  Take a look at "Fantasia" some time.  
Many folks were first introduced to classical music through that film 
and the "Night on Bald Mountain" scene can get pretty creepy.  I agree 
that "Pictures at an Exhibition" is a neat piece (one of my favorites, 
actually) but like rock music, it can be twisted by those who don't 
understand it.

Sandy

    Mark why do you pull out from a message only that you find fault with?
    
    Did you also read this?
    
    Discernment folks, discernment that we need to ask does this music,
    touch my heart in a real way, or just evoke a reaction that is
    prompted through rhythm and beats... sigh
    
    That was in the same message.. the very same note, and that was from
    the heart of someone who cares very much about any work for the Lord
    that is done through music... not from declaring a point of view.
    
    Another Sigh...

    Nancy,
    
    It touches my heart in a real way, as it does the many people, young
    and old alike, who've come forward, often with tears in their eyes, to
    thank us for sharing it with them.
    
    Rebecca

TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers"       10 lines   8-APR-1993 18:38
                  -< To quote a friend of mine: BALDERDASH! >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >Rock is intrisically bad, it is distorted music of God's... How do you
    >take something that has been distorted and make it good?  I dunno,
    >don't think it can be done.  At least not the kind I'm talking about.
    
    >>Rock is not intrinsically bad.  
    
    >Define Rock to you and and I'd almost believe that we are in agreement
     as to what is acceptable and unacceptable.
    
    >>Rock music is intrinsically devoid of value.  The value one places on
    >>it is bad or good.
    
    I would say the value the Holy Spirit places on it is good or bad, as
    determined by soulful searching.
    
    When you were glued to the TV set there were many programs that you
    just couldn't understand why some Christians that it was wrong.  Then
    as you weaned yourself from the TV, purged the influence, as you turn
    back on that same TV show, it became offensive... But it wasn't before,
    what made the difference.
    
    I say there is no difference with music.  Again, let me reiterate my
    life ate, slept and breathed rock music.. This not something I'm
    unfamiliar with.  Actually to be honest the only time truly enjoyed
    Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin was when I was stoned.  That says a lot!
    
    Again, I challange you to go without listening to rock music for 3
    months, I mean anything related or close to it, then turn it back on
    and see if they have the same flavor as before.
    
    Some may, but I believe much won't.
    
    In love,
    Nancy
    

      RE: <<< Note 86.131 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>

>>    When one begins to codify what is permitted and what is prohibited that
>>    which is not expressly stated in the Bible.  Inferrence on the
>>    principle of a matter is fine but should be carefully labelled as such.

        What is inferred by 1John 2:15-16 and related verses?

>>    Please re-read the testimonies of people who have been saved through a
>>    rock and roll ministry.  I'll bet I can find more of these testimonies
>>    that notes in a Mozart score.

        We have seen that side, you and I both.  Why are you not willing to
        see the other side?  Do all these continue in the faith?  How many
        fall away?  I know that at our church we see some fall away.  If
        this is the raging success you claim it is, we should be seeing 
        much fruit.  The fruit of these Christians should be other
        Christians.  This should be working exponentially.  Are all these
        folks properly discipled?  If this is all true, the likes of
        Clinton will be dusted in the next election.  I pray it is true. 
        This country badly needs a spiritual awakening.  Alas, I don't see
        it taking hold.
    
>>    I have a suspicion that you think you know the reason.  Why do you
>>    refuse to give ear to the testimonies of people who have used Rock and
>>    Roll to the documentable glory of God?

	I do not refuse to give it ear.  I've heard it.  I rejoice for
	those who are truly saved, regardless of the circumstances.  My
	prayer is for Christians to walk a holier walk.  The logic goes
	like this.

	1. Experts, Christian and secular, publish research that rock
	   music, irrespective of the words, sends a subliminal message
	   that corrupts our moral judgement over time.

        2. As part of its holiness doctrine, the bible copiously exhorts us
           to avoid those things which can corrupt us or our brethren.
	   
>>    Because the verses you have supplied do not say anything about Rock and
>>    Roll music being a sinful expression of music.  

        Does scripture have to be explicit to identify sin?  Is sin that is
        specific to technologically advanced civilisation excused because
        no prohibition against it is explicitly detailed in scripture? 
        And conversely, where does scripture explicitly say to use rock
        music for outreach and discipleship? 
    
>>    If I listen to rock and roll, (and I occasionally do, depending on your
>>    definition - then maybe I don't).  You are saying that I am
>>    participating in something unholy.  Your conviction is fine and is not
>>    in concert with mine.  You cannot see how our two convictions can be
>>    from the same God, right?  He's told you it is wrong, so to contradict
>>    that is to contradict God.  You can lighten the blow to me by calling
>>    me blinded or immature in my walk but it boils down to the same, does
>>    it not?

	I pray that as a Christian you don't react to preaching from the
	pulpit with this attitude.  Please open your heart and mind.  I am
	not condemning you.  Lighten up!
    
	Tony
	

    .142
    
    Rebecca could you tell me what you listen to, and perform?
    
    I have a feeling we're closer then you think?
    
    Nancy
    

    and if I may comment on my own note. .144
    
    I went 3 years without listening to ANYTHING remotely like Rock and
    Roll... 
    
    It made a big difference in my life.. those were some of the happiest
    years I recall...
    
    It is subliminal folks, and sometimes you just don't know until you let
    it go, just how much influence it had.
    
    Sigh,
    Nancy
    
    

	RE:          <<< Note 86.139 by FRETZ::HEISER "nothing but the blood" >>>
                               -< in a nutshell >-

    
>>    I've read books like this in the past and they're typically very
>>    non-objective witchhunters with an axe to grind against rock because it
>>    doesn't tickle their fancy.  How OBJECTIVE are YOUR sources?

        I've listed my sources.  You can determine their objectiviy for
        yourself.  Please list for us the axe grinders that you read.
        Explain why you think reputable researchers would go to all that
        trouble to publish an unpopular treatise because something didn't
        "tickle their fancy." 
    
>>    Because when people say things like what you've been saying, you're
>>    implying that our work for the Lord, His saving of souls, His touching
>>    lives, is in vain.

        Nope, I never said that.  I commend and respect your servant's
        heart and believe you have seen souls saved and lives changed. 
        Just want to alert you to the dangers of rock and how it can erode
        or negate testimony over time.

	Anecdote alert::
	
        Before she was saved, my wife was approached by people at work who
        claimed to know the lord.  She told me that she wasn't interested,
        because she didn't see any difference in their appearance or the
        music they listened to. She said she couldn't take them seriously. 
        Hey, it can work both ways as an outreach, but researchers warn
        that over time exposure to the rock idiom can cause problems.

	Please accept my wishes for you all to have an enjoyable Paschal.

	Tony
	

    
                          I WANT MY ZTV - also!  (re:Mike .143)
    
    The best CCM video ever made - Michael W. Smith - "Secret Ambition"
    IN MY HUMBLE OPINION!
    
    It highlights significant parts of Christ's life that includes his
    life, death, & resurrection.  It is very well done both in 
    accuracy, realisticness (is that a word), and editing/presentation.
    
    "Nobody knew His secret abmition.
    Nobody knew His claim to fame.
    He took the old rules steeped in tradition.
    He tore the holy veil away.
    
    Questioning those in powerful positions.
    Running to those who called His name.
    Nobody knew His secret ambition
    was to give His life away."
    
    
    PS. Richard J-Christie, where did Rock-n-roll get its name?

 I'm not Richard, but I believe the term "rock and roll" was first used by
a DJ on a radio station in Cleveland (Alan Friedman?).




Jim

>    Mark why do you pull out from a message only that you find fault with?

Space savings.  Getting to the crux of the issue.
Why should I pull out that which I agree, Nancy?  For what purpose?

>    Discernment folks, discernment that we need to ask does this music,
>    touch my heart in a real way, or just evoke a reaction that is
>    prompted through rhythm and beats... sigh

Do you have Amy Grant music, Nancy?  I believe you do.  And I believe
you enjoy it.

Mark

>    When you were glued to the TV set there were many programs that you
>    just couldn't understand why some Christians that it was wrong.  Then
>    as you weaned yourself from the TV, purged the influence, as you turn
>    back on that same TV show, it became offensive... But it wasn't before,
>    what made the difference.

I did not throw out my TV.  My weaning is to selectively choose which programs
I will watch, which is in the significant minority.  (Next?)

>    I say there is no difference with music. 

I agree.

>    Again, I challange you to go without listening to rock music for 3
>    months, I mean anything related or close to it, then turn it back on
>    and see if they have the same flavor as before.

I went without Coca Cola for 7 weeks last year.  I enjoy it today.

(Got 6 more replies to go through.)

    Nancy,                                                          
    
    I sing a wide range of things, many older pieces that are more in the
    classical tradition, hymns, etc.  What I'm referring to here is the
    newly formed group that I sing in at church. We're singing contemporary
    Christian music, Michael W. Smith, Amy Grant, Petra, Carmen, Keith
    Green, Steven Curtis Chapman, etc.  We're very concerned with the
    message we're conveying, so we're selective about which songs we sing,
    and try to always include several that are scripturally based. 
    
    The people that I've spoken to who feel as adamantly as you and Tony
    about rock music are people who at one time did not know the Lord and
    were heavily into rock and often drugs as well. I come from a different
    perspective, in that I don't know what it's like to not know Jesus, and
    then find Him. Sasha and I talked about this a little. I have fallen
    away before and all around me was darkness, but still God's hand was
    there, guiding me and leading me back to Him - His presence is and
    always has been very clear to me.  That said, I've never done drugs and
    I've never listened to rock music - Led Zeppelin, Van Halen, etc., if
    those things were alluring to me, then I would no doubt feel as you do,
    and would feel that there was a direct correlation between rock and a
    corrupt lifestyle. And to some no doubt there is a danger, but not to
    all - differences again.  Again, I don't feel we've truly defined what we're
    talking about here. Our group is nine singers, a drummer, a keyboard, a
    lead and a bass guitar. This music to me sets your feet tapping and
    your heart singing, nothing more.  Contemporary Christian music is new
    to me, so I haven't listened to much more than is needed to seek out
    music for the group and can't comment on Christian groups with a harder
    sound.  I guess what disturbs me is that Tony seems, and I stress
    seems, because I'm not sure, to be against anything that has a beat and
    a contemporary sound. And he and I are in complete disagreement that
    the words don't matter - they do. 
    
    People are going to listen to a variety of music, if you have found a
    particular type of music to be harmful to you, I would certainly not
    encourage you to listen to it.  But not everyone has been convicted of
    the same thing, and if people are determined to listen to rock, then
    I'd rather they listen to music about Jesus and life in Him than about
    sex and violence and drugs etc. Not everyone is saved and not everyone
    is in the same place, we can't force them to be or see as we do.
    
    Rebecca

.145 (Tony C)

>>>    When one begins to codify what is permitted and what is prohibited that
>>>    which is not expressly stated in the Bible.  Inferrence on the
>>>    principle of a matter is fine but should be carefully labelled as such.
>
>        What is inferred by 1John 2:15-16 and related verses?

1John 2:15  Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If
any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
 16  For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the
eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

You infer that this includes Rock and Roll, but not classical music, or 
folk music, or other types of music.  How did you come to the conclusion
that rock and roll music was the sole domain of the world?

>        We have seen that side, you and I both.  Why are you not willing to
>        see the other side?

If you will have read my notes, you would have seen that I did.  I have
said that there are INSTANCES of evil rock music and INSTANCE of good
rock music, and I believe INSTANCES of neutral (fun) rock music.  Have
you not seen this?

But this is not what I see you saying.  I see you saying that all rock
music is evil.

>Do all these continue in the faith? 

Charlie Rizzo (remember me mentioning him?) is an ordained minister of the
gospel this 20 years after his conversion are a rock and roll church.
Now will you believe my testimony, or his?

>        If this is the raging success you claim it is, we should be seeing 
>        much fruit.  The fruit of these Christians should be other
>        Christians. 

Where are you looking?  You will have nothing to do with Rock and Roll
and therefore cannot see the fruit of CCM.

>This should be working exponentially.  

This is dangerous ground to say how well it should be working, but if you like,
I'll warrant that sales of Christian Contemporary Music might be a good
indicator of its impact.  And before you say that it is a good indicator
of money making, how much did you pay for your latest Bible, or Bible
reference?

>Are all these folks properly discipled? 

I don't know.  Perhaps if you and I were there at a rock and roll invitation
service, we could help to ensure it.  (Tongue in cheek.)  Would you have
believed me is I just said "yes"?

>	1. Experts, Christian and secular, publish research that rock
>	   music, irrespective of the words, sends a subliminal message
>	   that corrupts our moral judgement over time.

What INSTANCES of rock and roll were studied?  CCM only?  CCM and neutral
Rock?  CCM, Neutral and evil rock?  Rock and roll and country?  How well
was this study conducted?  Do you know, or do you merely attest to the studies
validity because of what you sense in your spirit to be the case?

>        2. As part of its holiness doctrine, the bible copiously exhorts us
>           to avoid those things which can corrupt us or our brethren.

Some people have a conviction, even from the Holy Spirit.  They feel compelled
to warn others of the conviction they have.  When others do not share the
conviction that the Holy Spirit has given to them, the first persons claim
a "discernment" that because this is bad for them, it is bad for all.

This "discernment" comes off very strongly as a reclothing of "God told me
that you should[n't]...." or "I have a message from God for you."

I react unfavorably to this implication.

So my reaction is "discerned" to be conviction (with the condescending
'perhaps question mark') of the Holy Spirit on an area that the first group
has a conviction.  It certainly can't be that the other group indeed
uses Rock and Roll for the glory of God because you are convicted otherwise.
And it certainly cannot be that rock and roll can be used for fun without
an evil or good bent, either.  It can't these things because I have studies
which support my conviction.  So other reports must be tools of the devil
to confuse because God is not the author of Chaos.

I see you as expressing a conviction that the Holy Spirit has given you
and wanting to share that by telling others of the dangers you have
experienced at the hands of [instances of] rock and roll.  But this comes
off as claiming the moral high ground because "God has told me so" and this
is a danger that should be equally decried.  "Danger, danger, Will Robinson!  
You are in danger of presumption and usurping the role of the Holy Spirit!"
Because *YOU* have defined what "the world" is to be avoided.

I asked you about casual conversation that does not pertain to churchy
things and you pooh-poohed it as unrelated and irrelevant.  But, if there
is such a thing as good, bad, and neutral music, and further, such a thing
as good, bad, and neutral rock and roll, then it is extremely applicable.
In your casual conversation, you are to maintain a holy tongue.  So what
does this include?

Let me illustrate a bit further with the ten commandments.  How does one
NOT STEAL?  There are a billion trillion things I can do in life and NOT
STEAL.
I can type this reply and NOT STEAL.  The only way to break this commandment
is TO STEAL.  Now we come back to not being of the world.  How many ways of
normal life, can I "love not the world"?  I can do the dishes without 
loving the world.

>	I pray that as a Christian you don't react to preaching from the
>	pulpit with this attitude.  Please open your heart and mind.  I am
>	not condemning you.  Lighten up!
 
I'm being as light on you, Christian brother, about a perceived wrongful
attitude as you are on me about a perceived wrongful attitude.

Had you simply said, "I feel very convicted that Rock and Roll is not to be
part of my life, and here are the dangers that it poses to me (hip gyrations,
propensity towards lust, whatever); perhaps you may also suffer the same
affliction and temptation and so I warn you to remove it from your life.
I know that some rock and roll music can and is being used for God's glory, 
but the strains of the music appeal to me differently and I am sorely tested
by it." ... we can recognize this as a weak point for you and ensure that
we don't offend our weaker brother by playing rock and roll in your
presence.

To illustrate, I have a 13 year old daughter, and to look at her as a 
parent, she is lovely and turning into a beautiful young woman.  But
for a 15 year old boy, he can look at the same person, my daughter, and
lust after her.  The difference?  A weakness towards a tempation.
Certainly looking at my daughter is not sinful in and of itself.  
However, if is is accompanied with lust, then it is.  And if one is
prone to lust, then that person should do what he should to guard
against it, and train his eyes away from looking.  But looking in
and of itself is not sinful.

Now, atfer a lot of words, do YOU see how you are coming across?
Do YOU see that the other side sees you as in danger of (a) Judging,
(b) usurping the role of the Holy Spirit (and not preaching the
revealed word to all, but to you) (c) applying a personal conviction 
to the entire body of Christians?

Mark

    I have scanned this note and appologize if I re-itterate or contend
    with another.
    
    I believe I am saved. I know my Lord and He knows me. My Lord has told
    me - be all things to all people so they will come to the Lord and
    Glorify Him.  Tell me, how can I reach the zoned out rock and roller if
    I do not understand what is being fullfilled by the
    music/lyrics/rythm/etc. - Does this mean I myself must become
    perverted! By no means! Certainly not! But it is through the power of
    God that I may be able to reach out to a lost soul and pull him/her back
    to Christ. Not me but the Holy Spirit that leads me.
    
    Brothers, sisters in Christ. Be at peace and accept those whose
    ministry is different than yours. For some are teachers and some are
    doctors and some, well, some are musicians that feel lead to minister
    the Word of God to those who 'listen'. Can I judge the music, no. Can I
    judge the lyrics, yes. How? Against the Word of God - IFF the music
    is sold as Christian music. Can I judge secular lyrics, - no. Why?
    Because to a non-Christian, I am but a glanging gong. My opinion
    holds no value. So how do I reach them, easy, I meet them on their
    level, but bring my morals. Do I sin while doing this, I should hope
    not, for I do not wish to be a hypocrite. But want I want to do is
    not that which I do. So I see a struggle within me. All in all, what I
    am trying to say is - Thanks be to God , that He has seen fit to use
    all things to provide a WAY to eternal salvation.
    
    Some have said that rock and roll is evil. What they are saying also is
    that there is no good in it. FALSE! My God is not that limited!
    Certainly there will be those who will NEVER hear the soft voice of the
    shepherd, but, ohh that one lone person in the concert hall, even if
    that one is reached, what rejoicing there will be in Heaven!
    
    Please do not JUDGE that which is not for us to judge. DO Judge that
    which we are to judge. But in all things Let GOD do His work! You unto
    yourself will SAVE NO ONE! The most important person in the world is
    you. Guard yourself from what is evil. If your faith is such that you
    know you will be perverted, then STAY away from that fire! - BUT do not
    critize or judge another who is impervious to the temptation or that
    same fire. For who are you to JUDGE another's walk with God. (It is a
    different matter if you see the other person falling from his walk, but
    this too is difficult to decipher at times.)
    
    (a side note:
       I skydive. Do you know how many times I have been told by
       "christians" that I am tempting the Lord! That it is a sport
       invented by Satan.   - I have lost count.
       (well maybe it was, but God uses it too to reach sinners.)
       ( I do say a prayer before each jump, and thank the Lord when
         I am safely upon the ground once again, -it's a habit)
    
       For me, well I see it as a ministry. -You laugh! Well, let me
       tell you there are some real seedy characters at the Drop Zone
       folks. And do you know what, I love them. I love them because they
       are there in all their filth and perfection. - All know that I am
       a christian. They all know I do not sware, drink or entertain
       course joking. Do I push this upon them? NO! Absolutely not. I do
       not intend to preach at the DZ, but I minister each time I am there.
       How? Simply by my presents! They take it unto themselves to control
       themselves around me. Is this an act? No, it is respect. Why?
       Because I am "one of them". More and more people have approached
       me and are curious about my faith. Praise be to God.
    )
    
    All that you do, do it in love. For there is no greater gift than the
    gift of love. Allow each person to use the talents given them from the
    Lord, - for His good, and love them for their abilities to do those
    things which you (I) can not do. It is very difficult, but with God's
    help all things can be accomplished.
    
      In Christ's Love,
        PDM_who_likes_christian_rock_music_,_hates_acid_and_hard_rock_but_
           _does_not_critize_another_for_liking_it.

>          <<< Note 86.133 by FRETZ::HEISER "nothing but the blood" >>>
>    That's Modest Mussorgsky.  I'm not affected that way by his music. 
>    Especially "Pictures at an Exhibition."

    Even when Emerson, Lake, and Palmer play it?  :-)
    
    Markel

          <<< Note 86.143 by FRETZ::HEISER "nothing but the blood" >>>
                              -< I WANT MY ZTV! >-

    See my answer in 86.2 (to your 86.1 -- my that seems like long ago).  :-)

Tony, Nancy, and others, 

My apologies for the length of .154.  

However, such phrases as "reacting to a sermon from the pulpit" are 
condescending.  I might just aseasily hear the sermon in .154 from
the pulpit.  How are you to react to my "preaching" in .154?

The fact is, we would both feel justifiably uneasy about a preached
proclamation that we didn't feel was all that Biblical but rather 
came from the Pastor's personal conviction about "what color car you
drove - red is too flashy and unbecoming a Christian."

My mother-in-law went to church once as a young lady (she hadn't been in ages).
As they were leaving and the pastor was shaking hands, he called my 
mother-in-law a painted hussy (she wore lipstick at that time).
My mother in law does not wear much in the way of make-up these days,
but it really put her out (you know, about women adorning themselves).

Years later, she met the same preacher, whose wife had (gasp) earrings
and lipstick (which my wife does now, but they're clip ons - no piercing yet).
Things that make you go Hmmm...

How far do we want/need to go?  We could be Quakers and sit on separate
sides of the church.  

When we attempt to codify, we must codify the principle! not the specific.
The prinicple is to abstain from that which is evil.  Now, one brother has
defined something that is evil for him (and her).  By all means!  Abstain 
from it and do not take our liberty for yours, for you would do so at
your peril.  But be sure not to call evil what the Word has not clearly
defined as evil (which has not been done).

Mark

    Dear Family,
    
    This note string has become way too sensitive for me to even continue
    reading it...
    
    Rebecca, I'll be writing you offline, but will no longer discuss this
    in here.  I believe that when dirision comes its time to let it go.
    BTW, we aren't far apart in our hearts. :-)
    
    Coming in this morning and having this note string be the first thing
    to read was not edifying or exhorting... and honestly, I don't like it. 
    I don't like my participation in it.
    
    But I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep
    that which I've committed unto Him against that day.
    
    Mark,  in front of this family and read-onlies, I want to say, the
    tears that came this morning as I read this, was because I was thinking
    that perhaps there is someone who's whole life is dedicated to the
    ministry in Rock-n-Roll, and honestly, that terms has a broad swipe,
    and I'd almost guarantee [not sure though], that the music in that
    ministry would be okay.  I have a deep conviction that certain music is
    harmful, regardless of the words attached [not because of personal
    preference], but because of how I see it affecting folks... folks that
    are precious to God.
    
    No, I don't want to be a stumblingblock and honestly, I agree with what
    Gil said in another topic!  Let's win the lost, not fight amongst the
    brethren about how to.
    
    Nancy
    

>    Mark,  in front of this family and read-onlies, I want to say, the
>    tears that came this morning as I read this, was because I was thinking
>    that perhaps there is someone who's whole life is dedicated to the
>    ministry in Rock-n-Roll, and honestly, that terms has a broad swipe,
>    and I'd almost guarantee [not sure though], that the music in that
>    ministry would be okay.  I have a deep conviction that certain music is
>    harmful, regardless of the words attached [not because of personal
>    preference], but because of how I see it affecting folks... folks that
>    are precious to God.
    
Certain music may be harmful, we agree.  But not everything considered
rock and roll should be considered harmful.

>    No, I don't want to be a stumblingblock and honestly, I agree with what
>    Gil said in another topic!  Let's win the lost, not fight amongst the
>    brethren about how to.
    
Perhaps it is me who doesn't know how to handle conflict, but I don't 
think so.  I have never once doubted your Christianity for the conviction
you have held, even when strenously opposing the application of that
conviction to all.  Paul opposed Barnabas over John Mark.  Paul
opposed Peter over the circumcision group.  How did these brothers
handle the conflict of CONVICTIONS?  Peter saw what Paul was saying 
was true and no longer sided with the circumcision group. Paul did NOT
see what Barnabas was saying and continued to oppose the inclusion of
John Mark on the second missionary journey.  They parted ways: Paul
took Silas and Barnabas took John Mark.  Neither doubted the Christianity
of the other though they were very entrenched in what they felt was
THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

And so, DESPITE the conflict (which you term "fighting"), I hereby declare
my love for you and Tony, and Andrew, and any other Christian brother or
sister who also views this as you do.  I'm not interested in parting ways,
by no means, but neither have I been persuaded of your conviction in the
matter.  I do know that there is SOME music I won't listen to. INSTANCES.

Conflict hurts you, Nancy.  But I wonder if it is conflict or if it is
I who hurt you.  (I hurt you by conflicting, perhaps?)  If the parenthetical
is correct, should we have simply nodded our heads and agreed with any
person's conviction?  You have conflicted (strenuously) in other topics,
using the word Balderdash with another.  Yet, because this topic is closer
to your own convictions, it hurts the more.  That's natural.

I'm sorry for the hurt I've caused you.  I don't see this argument between
brothers and sisters as damaging to the body as you may see it.  Exercise hurts;
I've tried it so I know. (;-/)  At least, it doesn't have to be.

With sincere love,

Mark

    Nancy,
    
    I didn't mean to say anything offensive and I ask your forgiveness if I
    did say something unwittingly that was hurtful. I think this is a
    legitimate conflict and legitimate discussion, good points have been
    made on both sides and have given much food for thought in both
    directions. Isn't that the point, to try and understand one another and
    learn from one another in our varied walks, lives and convictions? I
    have tears in my eyes now because I'm both confused and hurt to think
    that I've hurt you in any way. Please know it was not my intention.
    
    Rebecca

    I'm currently reading a book called "Roaring Lambs".  The subtitle
    is something like:  Gentle ways to radically change your world.
    
    The premise is that believers should not just boycott things of the
    world that are bad influences -- we should create good alternatives.
    That's what I understand Christian rock music to be.
    
    JMO,
    Sue
    

    Mark,
    
    It is not the conflict that hurts me, what hurts me is the anger
    displayed by the tone of certain notes... anger hurts, not conflict.
    
    Expressed conviction with love doesn't come across angry...
    Balderdash can be placed in the category of anger [which I didn't use
    it in], and have thus decided it is too strong a word to use.  
    Because if anger can be seen in it, then its not usable.  This is
    a medium where *words* are *everything* and should be chosen carefully.
    
    Nancy
    

    Rebecca,
    
    You have not hurt me in that way... really.  Sorry to make it sound so. 
    I suppose for me to find this kind of conflict FIRST THING in the
    morning was a bit much...  But it couldn't be helped ... that's just
    how the notes conference works. %-}
    
    I don't mind having different views and will love you regardless of
    whether we agree or not... that's me, always has been, always will be,
    as I stated in another note... its *anger* expressed that hurts me, and
    I don't recall anger coming from you.
    
    Thanks for caring... so, we're both blubber bunnies... how appropriate
    for Easter! :-)
    
    Love,
    Nancy

    Also, to answer Mark's question about Amy Grant, yes I have her
    Christmas CD that came out this year, and I have a tape that someone
    copied for me of the song about an abused woman... which brought tears
    to my eyes...  But then anytime I hear about an abused child, it moves
    me in that way.
    
    Nancyz

Amy Grant sings to rock and roll.

And now I'm the bad guy again because I've used words that were perceived
to be angry.  Passion from "the other side" is anger?  I use the same 
word you used (balderdash), and yet my use of it is in anger?  My use
of the word simply means, "I think it is ridiculous to think so."

We have a conflict of ideas, passionately.  We've expressed passionate
pleas on both sides.  Please don't escalate this to a matter of "you've
hurt me because of anger in the tone of your replies."  The issue is:
is rock music intrinsically evil.  You have said that it is and I have
said balderdash! with many words on both sides to explain our conflict.
But the issue is NOT am I angry with Nancy or Tony, and do I not love them
as much as they love me.  If you said this, I would say again Balderdash!

Far from it, it is out of LOVE that I strenously object to the idea of 
saying that a type of music is INTRINSICALLY evil.  To say so condemns
people (not convicts, condemns).  Just as you want to convince me of
your passionate conviction, I would also convince you of mine!

Conflict.

Conflict can occur without anger, and I can exhibit passion without being
angry at YOU.  I am sorry that you feel that I have been angry with YOU.
I am not sorry for opposing the premise that this type of music has an
intrinsic sinister value to it.

With love,

Mark

    Mark,
    
    I will continue this offline with you...  I don't sense at all from
    your notes that you even give one iota about compassion... it is a
    matter of *perception* and *interpretation*... and therefore, without
    your talent of being a wordsmith, I feel as tho' I'm no match to you. 
    I can speak from my heart and again you blast back at me.. and you say
    it is in love.. again *perception and interpretation* of demonstrative
    love????
    
    Offline, Bro...
    
    Nancy

| I can speak from my heart and again you blast back at me.. and you say
| it is in love.. again *perception and interpretation* of demonstrative
| love????

	This happens a lot of times in here, doesn't it? Not from just one, but
from many. But as far as this topic goes, it seems pretty silly to me. In some
topics many have stated that God can use anyone, anything, and yet in this
topic it seems as though many are saying NOT with heavy metal type of music.
Get with it people! Either God can use any means or tools to get His message
out or He can't! I prefer the former and NOT the latter.....


Glen

    Glen,

    God has used a donkey to get His message across, but that does not
    mean that it is His preferred medium.

    Mark L.

    re: .169
    
    God has mediums He prefers going through?  Hmmm ...
    ;^)
    
    Steve

RE: -.1


Rolling *on the floor*

Sandy

    
    I prefer medium-to-well done myself!!! :) :)
    
    I'm reminded of that donkey (didn't God call it something else?? ;),
    when I see some talking in this conference...
    
    
    Andy
    

>    I'm reminded of that donkey (didn't God call it something else?? ;),
    
    To tell you the truth, Andy, I backspaced over what I initially wrote
    and replaced it with "donkey".  Sometimes being "scripturally correct"
    (at least, KJV-wise) may not be the wisest thing. :-)  (Ref. 2 Pet. 2:16)
    
    Mark L.

>Note 86.69                         Z MUSIC TV                          69 of 173
>ICTHUS::YUILLE "Thou God seest me"                   22 lines   7-APR-1993 13:42


>Exactly, David! - surely, being righteous doesn't mean being insipid!  God
>is worthy of the most extravagent of praise ... sometimes needing to be in
>private (thinking of the more famous David whose extravagance of praise 
>was more public than his wife approved of, though God accepted it, rather 
>than upholding Michal's judgement).


	&rew, I really like just about everything you put in here, but 
this sounds like something put in by a Clinton-appointed spin doctor. It 
definitely isn't the way I remember it, so I looked it up in my RSV - 

2 Samuel 6:12-16    (I capitalized some phrases here)

	And it was told King David, "The Lord has blessed the household
of Obededom and all that belongs to him, because of the ark of God".
So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom to 
the city of David with rejoicing; and when those who bore the ark of the Lord 
had gone six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatling. And David DANCED 
BEFORE THE LORD WITH ALL HIS MIGHT; and David was girded with a linen ephod. 
So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the Lord 
WITH SHOUTING, AND WITH THE SOUND OF THE HORN.
	As the ark of the Lord came into the city of David, Michal
the daughter of Saul looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping 
and dancing before the Lord; and she DESPISED HIM IN HER HEART.

2 Samuel 6:20-23    (BTW, in my Harper study Bible, this section is called
		   "Michal's sin")

	And David returned to bless his household. But Michal the
daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, "How the King of 
Israel honored himself today, uncovering himself today before the eyes of 
his servants' maids, as one of the vulgar fellows shamelessly uncovers
himself!" And David said to Michal, "It was before the Lord, who chose me
above your father, and above all his house, to appoint me prince over Israel,
the people of the Lord-and I will make merry before the Lord, I will make 
myself yet more contemptible than this, and I will be abased in your eyes; 
but by the maids of whom you have spoken, by them I shall be held in honor". 
And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death.


	It seems like Michal was far more interested in outward apprearances
and "proper dignified behavior" then what is inside a man's heart. And we all 
know what God thought about her attitude  - no detached processes for her.

	David was an excitable and emotional sort, and got into some 
serious sin. But, in the final analysis, he was a man who sincerely 
desired to follow God - a man after God's own heart - and God could care 
less how loud he shouted (to some, David might have looked like he was calling 
attention to himself, but God knew better) - or how he looked.


What can we learn from Michal's attitude?


>I've been in meetings where a little delicate 'jigging' was in order, 
>because the presence of the LORD was *exciting*.  I could see that it was 
>decent and in order (when I paused from my attitude of praise, which was 
>focussed on the LORD, and didn't notice anyone else).  At the same time, I 
>could see a man whose danceing was rather different.  He'd brought 
>something of the world in, and it was rather unsuitable, but really, we 
>were too intent on the LORD to worry about that.  The LORD could speak to 
>him about it if necessary (maybe using one of his elders)...

	&drew, this really touched my funny bone!


	Bob

	Hello Tony,

Often in this note you reference the "derision" and "mocking" you feel 
from other people. Tony, just because you open your notes with Bible 
passages doesn't disqualify you from "bashing" yourself - especially, as 
Mark and others have pointed out, passages that need your own (or your
pastor's) interpretation to be relevant.

    No book can be used to heal like the Bible. Because of its power, I believe
no book can be used to hurt like the Bible. Read some of the passages you
reference, and put yourself in the place of those reading them. I'm not
perfect either, as I've mentioned in another note, I seem to write as many
apologies as replies, but it does bother me when one doesn't consider a
reply potentially hurtful just because it starts with a Bible passage, no 
matter how it is used.

>Note 86.20                         
>LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits"         

>>>As to territory stolen (or profaned), put away those rainbow stickers, for
>>>the New Agers have taken a shine to them.  Oh, and crystals are a very hot
>>>item.
>
>        Indeed, we should avoid giving the appearance that we place any
>        spiritual importance on images or objects wrought by the hands of
>        men or appearing in nature.  


	Sheesh, nothing, (living or not), in this world (which God created), 
even symbols referenced in the Bible itself, is useful in knowing and loving 
God? I don't know if you've read C.S. Lewis, but the last book in his space 
trilogy is a corker. It talks about a corporation call N.I.C.E. (actually run 
by the evil one) who wants to make a perfect world. It turns out that one of 
it's plans it to basically wipe out everything living, so it will be "perfect". 
I think C.S. Lewis was a genius. You can't throw out the Earth in order to 
worship God better, it's just not part of our nature. One of the concepts 
I've read recently that I think is very valid is that man uses symbols to 
communicate and understand - that is the way he is made. Nature has greatly 
helped me appreciate the majesty of God. I don't have a rainbow sticker, but 
if I did I wouldn't throw it away just because New Age has decided it belongs 
to them. 

>Note 86.67                         
>LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits"         

>        Thirdly, where in scripture is *HOLY* music to be used for
>        entertainment or outreach?


	This is totally incomprehensible to me! I am an admitted freak in this
conference - while I believe the Bible is Holy and is God's written word, I 
believe the Bible passes God by reference, not by value. You can't find 
detailed info on every possible situation in there, and I believe people can 
get into a lot of hurtful situations trying to come up with detailed Biblical 
references for every possible situation - I can't imagine having to consult 
the Bible in every situation I am put in where I can talk about God, and 
see whether it was done that way in the Bible. (?)


>Note 86.122                        
LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits"          


>        Before she was saved, my wife was approached by people at work who
>        claimed to know the lord.  She told me that she wasn't interested,
>        because she didn't see any difference in their appearance or the
>        music they listened to. She said she couldn't take them seriously. 


	(Silly alert) I bet your wife was put off because they had spent
all their time in the wilderness and smelled real bad. Or maybe it was their
dress - that camel hair and leather girdle outfit looks really bad - 
or maybe it was because they hadn't finished eating yet and they 
hadn't wiped the locusts and wild honey from their chins yet with a napkin -
:-)   Seriously, I wonder how her attitude would be now if she met those
people - remember, your wife was not saved yet herself, and her idea of what
is important and what is not might have been a bit "worldly" at that time -
i.e., "he wears a Brooks Brothers suit, he must be worth $200 an hour".
It's God working through a person that is important, not what they wear 
or eat, or whatever -

Luke 7:33-35 "For John the Baptist has come eating no bread
and drinking no wine; and you say 'He has a demon'. The Son of man has come
eating and drinking; and you say 'Behold, a glutton and drunkard, a friend
of tax collectors and sinners! Yet wisdom is justified by all her children"

	Despite all the great work your church has done in evangelism, 
you have saved no one. God prepares peoples' hearts, and then God 
evangelizes through us. We are just the vessels that allow him to work, and
admittedly the ability He has to work through us is tied to how 
holy we are. But I don't think how we dress, eat, etc is going to stop 
Him from working through us.



>Note 86.145                        Z MUSIC TV                         145 of 174
>LEDDEV::CAMUSO "alphabits"                           63 lines   8-APR-1993 19:09
>                            -< Lighten up, please. >-

>        We have seen that side, you and I both.  Why are you not willing to
>        see the other side?  Do all these continue in the faith?  How many
>        fall away?  I know that at our church we see some fall away.  


	This is interesting to me. Those in your church that have "fallen 
away" - did they renounce Christ as their Saviour? Did they proclaim
themselves atheists or agnostics?  What exactly made them leave your church?
I know it's off the topic, but I'm very interested by this...


	Bob

    Brothers and Sisters
    
    I came across this poem by Shel Silverstein, whom I don't know his
    Spiritual standing... but this poem seems appropriate for this topic.
    
                        ITS DARK IN HERE
    
    		I'm writing these poems
    		From inside a lion.
    		And its rather dark in here.
    		So please excuse the handwriting
    		Which may not be too clear.
    		But this afternoon by the lion's cage
    		I'm afraid I got too near.
    		And I'm writing these lines
    		From inside a lion,
    		And its rather dark in here.
    
    What the *lion* represents to each person in here, is the point of view
    from which you come.  Sometimes, we *all*, are writing from inside the
    lion and its rather dark in here.
    
    I'd like to see this topic write/locked before it causes more rift,
    then is really warranted.  Discouragement is a powerful weapon used by
    the enemy... this note has that potential, to cause discouragement.
    
    I'd ask that we each examine the positions we hold, and ask are we
    inside our lions?
    
    
    
    

>    Even when Emerson, Lake, and Palmer play it?  :-)
    
    Especially! ;-)  Actually I have a CD with both the original piano
    interpretation and the orchestrated version.

>    See my answer in 86.2 (to your 86.1 -- my that seems like long ago).  :-)

>    The best CCM video ever made - Michael W. Smith - "Secret Ambition"
>    IN MY HUMBLE OPINION!
    
    Agreed!  The footage of Jesus comes from a movie though.  It wasn't made
    just for MWS.
    
    Mike

Hey - you really are a tremendous bunch...  I ducked this one aeons back, 
because, like Nancy, I felt that it was hurting people, and I wanted to 
rather pray about the attitudes and address this with the mods....  

Having the UK Friday Holiday (and Monday to come), I was a bit out of date,
and just caught up on this one, to find, I *think* that it's cleared, at
least some...  And we *did* pray, as I'm certain, many did - and are doing.

All of us are responsible to the LORD for where we stand ourselves, not
for making sure anyone / everyone else stands there, though we can gently
indicate where we have had the LORD's leading.  No-one's view gets 
impressed on anyone else ... that would be law, not grace.  We respond to 
His love.  

We need to remember that as we're limited to the written word, it can come 
over much harsher than it's meant.  So be kind and compassionate to one 
another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ, God forgave you... 
(Ephesians 4:32).

I appreciated .176 very much, Nancy.  From the blind enclosure of our
individual lions it's easy to condemn everything outside them.  We need to
be listening to the LORD not only for what to say, but double careful on
how to say it. 

Keep praying, folks, for the peace of the conference and for the LORD to 
continue to bless us...

If anyone genuinely still feels hurt by what has been said, or is being 
said, rather than defend it here (which is likely to give rise to a 
defensive misunderstanding), please address it in mail, either to the 
individual concerned, or, if it's too sensitive to take direct, feel free
to take it through a moderator, for instance, to help you resolve.  Hurts
left to fester leave spiritual wounds which are harder to deal with later. 
Healed promptly, they let the love of Jesus flow in our hearts to minister
to all concerned. 

					love you *all*
							Andrew

    Since the moderators have been at odds in this conference, I wonder how
    many participants would want to bring their conflicts to the
    *moderators*???? :-)
    
    Well, folks, I think its important to put in here, that although Mark
    and I disagree on many things, we also agree on many things and we have
    a bond through Christ, that allows their to be conflict and even
    sometimes hurt between ourselves without it being terminal.
    
    Mark and I are siblings [as all of you are], and we bring our
    individuality into this conference.  I praise God for it and thank God
    for Mark, as he is a true friend to me.
    
    We moderators are not without fault, but I can say that we are also not
    without Grace. 
    
    In Him,
    Nancy

Hi Bob,

Glad you appreciated .69 .... (I think you said?;-)

� this sounds like something put in by a Clinton-appointed spin doctor. 
Have to forgive me ... I'm not up on the terminology here, though I'm 
afraid I recognise the name in the above ;-} ... but spin doctor?  I'm not 
really up on politics.

� It definitely isn't the way I remember it, so I looked it up in my RSV - 
Yeah - I confess, I did just summarise the particular point I needed.  Not
trying to misrepresent Scripture, but to use the most direct way I could to 
convey what you did by uppercasing.  

I'm sorry if you feel it misrepresented the facts - did you?  I'm in 
agreement with what you put, but it goes beyond what I was trying to 
address at the time...

I could go on considerably about the Michal atitudes today, and the David
attitudes (sometimes suppressed because of Michals of either sex who are
distracted by others worshipping instead of being lost in worshipping the
LORD themselves); also the look-alike David attitudes which come from man
rather than from genuine excitement with the LORD.  But I won't ;-) 

�>The LORD could speak to him about it if necessary (maybe using one of his 
�>elders)...
�	&drew, this really touched my funny bone!

Glad you enjoyed it ... I see how it could be taken ;-)
- but you get my point? - that sometimes someone in a spiritually
responsible position may be used by the LORD to indicate to someone in the
fellowship that they're out of line, when they're too locked up in it to
hear for themselves, and when it may be distracting others' worship?

 - or maybe I said something else.....maybe you should get to me offline... ;-}

Guess all I really meant is that God means our relationship with Him to be 
the greatest excitement imaginable.  And then some.  Too often we give 
another impression.  I'd better be careful or I'll go wildly off topic 
here, because He's *so* exciting....

							&rew

    Hmmm.  You know, I've actually read each one of these notes.  I do
    agree that there have been a few feelings being hurt, and perhaps this
    note should be write-locked.  But I'd hate to see that done.
    
    The following are just my thoughts on the matter, so take it with a
    grain of salt.   First regarding Contemporary Christian Music.  -I'm
    not talking about Striper -which is heavy metal rock.  I still can't
    get used to that, but I don't like heavy metal music anyway.  I listen
    to a Christian radio station that plays CCM, and I haven't heard one
    song that is not biblically sound.  In fact, the songs really minister
    to me.  
    
    Question for people who don't like CCM:  Is it just the beat you don't
    like?  With the songs I listen to, it can't be the lyrics.  They are
    biblically sound.   Michael W. Smith, Wayne Watson, Twila Paris, Amy
    Grant, the Wynans, the Imperials.  I could go on and on, but surely you
    aren't talking about this music as being from the devil?   How could
    music that talks about God's love be from the devil?  This sounds like
    arguements from the 70's.  (no flame intended)
    
    I'll be quiet now, for fear of stirring up hurt feelings and chairs
    flying (smile).  Just kidding, but I have to admit that I was afraid to
    enter a reply to this string for fear of stepping on a brother or
    sisters wings.  
    
    
    And Nancy, I love you too.  I didn't see Metcalfe's notes as attacking,
    but I know when something upsets us, then it UPSETS us.  Hope you and 
    Mark worked it out.  As I have said in the past, lets agree to
    disagree.  (its ok, really.  it'd be boring if everyone agreed with us
    all the time)
    
    
    Donna Huddleston                                                      

    I remember a time when I was uncomfortable with contemporary music in
    the church.  Looking back, I attribute it to classical conditioning
    from my parents (i.e., ala Pavlov's dog).  Besides, if you're
    uncomfortable in a church, you're probably in the wrong one.  ;-)
    
    Speaking of which, our church held Easter services in a local arena. 
    Over 5,000 showed up and 120 souls were saved.  In addition to the
    presentation of the gospel by our pastor, Dennis Agajanian and our 
    church's version of the Maranatha Praise Band ministered in music.  Some
    of it was even rock!  Afterall, you couldn't play "Jesus, Mighty God!"
    any other way ;-)  Finally, I like to think that God worked through
    everyone involved to speak to those 120 that came forward.
    
    Praise God,
    Mike

    BTW - I'd like to invite all you musicians and music lovers over to
    ATLANA::CCM, especially you Tony!  Sure, there are some discussions
    about CCM artists that use rock, but there are also many informative
    topics on worship leading, spiritual warfare and the musician, etc.
    
    Mike (CCM's co-moderator)

>Note 86.183
ICTHUS::YUILLE "Thou God seest me"                   
>                             -< Hi Bob - re .174 >-

>Glad you appreciated .69 .... (I think you said?;-)

>Glad you enjoyed it ... I see how it could be taken ;-)
>- but you get my point? - that sometimes someone in a spiritually
>responsible position may be used by the LORD to indicate to someone in the
>fellowship that they're out of line, when they're too locked up in it to
>hear for themselves, and when it may be distracting others' worship?

	Yes, Andrew, I completely understand your point. I wasn't 
laughing at your opinion of the guy you thought was out of line -
I understand exactly what you were getting at. I just tried to imagine a 
number of people "jigging" and for some reason I just started laughing...
...NO offense meant, but the "jigging" started me up - even now as I write
this I'm starting to get the shakes.....I can be very silly.

	Andrew, I respect you greatly, and I try and make it a point
to throughly read your stuff (I can't study everything here)
because of the high regard I have for your opinion. Honest. I can't
think of any (previous) instance where I had any disagreement with anything 
you've written, and have learned a great deal from it - but, to again
be honest, I was really surprised by the synopsis you gave of
David's dancing before the Lord - but it's no biggie, I said my peace, 
and I'm going to shut up here for a while and take another 
Bob_stop_running_at_the_keyboard_sabbatical. But, before I go again,

>
>� this sounds like something put in by a Clinton-appointed spin doctor. 
>Have to forgive me ... I'm not up on the terminology here, though I'm 
>afraid I recognise the name in the above ;-} ... but spin doctor?  I'm not 
>really up on politics.
>

	Never mind, I told you I am silly. However, since you
are from the establishment (England) I will relate something
political you will understand - only two teams are going to make it
from group 2, and they're gonna be Poland and Holland. England is
gonna choke big-time, and we both know it! Maybe I'll get a chance to 
see Poland play right here in the good old US of A next year!


	Take care brother,


	Bob

Uh, thanks Bob ... 

Now you've got *me* going with the shakes too ...  	 ;-)

						Andrew

    I wasn't sure where to put this... so I put it here.
    
    During the Michael Card Concert, he made a statement that he didn't
    know the direction CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN music was taking.  He made a
    comment almost under his breath [the person sponsoring his tour also
    sponsors the *other* ones to which Michael was referring], that *much*
    of what is out there today doesn't even represent Christ.
    
    Comments...???

    No surprise.  When the major Christian labels sold out to giants like 
    EMI and Sony their influence and business focus took over.  Folks like
    Michael Card wouldn't even get a record deal today if they were just
    starting out.

    .190
    
    I think your right... What do you think is the best way to tell which
    artists are there for the bucks [sorry but I tend to think this is Glen
    Campbell] and those that are in it for the ministry...???  Except to
    see them in concert.
    
    I was very disappointed in the Wayne Watson tour.... Why do we have
    these events and NOT have an INVITATION for salvation????
    
    

>    I think your right... What do you think is the best way to tell which
>    artists are there for the bucks [sorry but I tend to think this is Glen
>    Campbell] and those that are in it for the ministry...???  Except to
>    see them in concert.
    
    I think their lyrics and actions say a lot about their walk with God. 
    If you catch them on the radio, or see them in videos on TV (CBN and
    TBN have CCM video shows), you can pretty much sense that.  
    
>    I was very disappointed in the Wayne Watson tour.... Why do we have
>    these events and NOT have an INVITATION for salvation????
    
    I'm going to see him and Phil Keaggy on the 31st (won 2 tickets).  I
    have no idea why altar calls are a thing of the past for most groups. 
    If the venue was very large and crowd control was a concern, I might be
    able to understand it.  On the other hand, Billy Graham has done it for 
    decades in huge venues.  I sincerely hope the problem isn't a lack of
    counselors and new believers' materials (or the record companies
    refusing to fund the costs for the materials/Bibles).

    This is apparently an eternal debate :-)
    
    There are believers in every field of employment; be it (heaven forbid)
    the computer industry, the music/entertainment industry, finance,
    politics (is that even possible? ;-), etc.
    
    If a believer is *honest* about his intent; e.g., "Look - I'm a
    believer who is talented in music and intend to make a good living from
    it as my profession - but not as a ministry", then great - so be it. 
    Don't expect "altar calls" (I hate those anyway...) and don't get upset
    when that artist doesn't sing Biblical texts in every song.
    
    Where I have a problem is the garbage that is called "ministry" when
    honestly, it's nothing more than an avenue to make some money; and that
    happens not only in music, but in much "TV 'evangelism'" too.
    
    Many times, the audience puts requirements on artists that the artists
    themselves never set out to do.
    
    When an artist *does* call his work "ministry", then it should be held
    up to scrutiny on that level.  Michael Card is a *shining* example of a
    gifted Bible scholar who communicates with brilliant, passionate music 
    and isn't "in it" for the money.  His work is clearly ministry.
    
    just some thoughts.

I agree with you Steve. It's a thing of preaching/singing to people what they
want to hear (and I guess they draw the crowds, and get the bucks) vs preaching
/singing what the people NEED to hear.

Are both "better" than secular music? Well, they both get the message across,
that Jesus is God, and salvation is needed. So, yes, they are both better than
secular music, where there is either nothing said about God, or nothing good is
said about God.

But, as in preaching, if the truth is mixed with "what the people want to hear",
as in a watered down gospel, or one with a twist, is it still percieved as good?

I'm not saying God can't reach people even through a word in a song in secular
music, because I believe He can do anything, anyhow He chooses. But we should be
cautious as to the content of the message of anything we hear.

As far as alter calls, why don't you like them? There are many who genuinely
give their lives to God at that moment, and without them, perhaps they wouldn't?

Bob

    .194
    
    I would agree with what you have written Bob.  And, I too, am curious
    as to what is wrong with an altar call? or freudianly spelt alter call.
    :-) :-)

    re: altar call tangent
    
    Please remember that I didn't say that *He* hates them - just that *I*
    do.  There's an opinion for ya - take it or leave it ;-)
    
    Just not my cup of tea.  Frequently they're laden with too much emotional 
    tugging (which He can *also* use, BTW), hardly ever enough follow-up and 
    discipling.  Either way, I don't think the presence or absence of an
    altar call at a concert is a good (or sole) method of evaluating the
    sincerity of the artist.
    
    I've been to a few Michael Card concerts and I only remember him
    offering a chance to pray for salvation at one of them (and even this
    is quite different than an altar call).  The lack of an a.c. at his
    concert doesn't diminish his ministry IMO, nor would the presence of
    one augment it IMO.
    
    

    I agree Michael didn't have an altar call, but he did have a call for
    the unsaved....  This was not even mentioned in the Wayne Watson tour. 
    The only thing Wayne spoke about was purity and his life-term marriage.
    Which had merit and is needed.  But more importantly is salvation
    [imho]. 
    
    BTW, I know you said *you*, not He. :-)
    
    Also, it is my experience that making public your profession via an
    altar call is a very important step which is then confirmed through
    baptism... but then again I was raised this way.

    by the way folks, altar calls are a particularly Baptist sort of thing
    and done by others of the same ilk.
    
    There are scads of Christians in other sects who do not include altar
    calls as a part of receiving the gospel of Jesus Christ.
    
    Love ya!
    jeff

    .198
    
    I thought I said that. :-) :-)

�    by the way folks, altar calls are a particularly Baptist sort of thing
�    and done by others of the same ilk.

Hi Jeff .... and I thought they were a more Pentecostal sort of thing!  
Though agreed, also done by others of various ilks ... ;-)

I suppose that just comes from going to a Baptist church myself ... 

There are those in my church leadership who would react strongly against an
altar call for a number of reasons.  Probably the strongest would be its
name, as there is no altar now - the last Sacrifice has been made (Hebrews
7:28).  

The other objection is that it plays on people's emotions, and takes 
advantage of their heightened state to trigger a step when their mind is 
not in full control.  Also laying the church open to this charge publicly, 
by the media, etc.

I don't have a problem with 'altar calls' as such myself.  I'd prefer to 
call them something else, though I see a relevance in placing oneself on 
the altar before the LORD.  The emotional awareness I would have thought 
was a very real part of the LORD working within us, and a response to His
voice is at least as real and valid as, say, a reasoned logical decision to 
accept words as understood to be spoken by the preacher.  The latter might 
well be suspect as a merely intellectual assent, rather than a response
from heart desire.  But then, maybe it's because of our English suppression
of emotion - a God-given characteristic of humanity, which (in my view)
should be controlled but not suppressed.  Another topic, but maybe that's 
why it takes a Pentecostal to rise to it 'over here' ;-).

						God bless
							Andrew

    Hey Andrew,
    
    I guess I should say Southern Baptist (but there may be other Baptists
    in the U.S. which do the same), the largest Protestant denomination in
    the U.S.  You've made another good point though concerning the
    Pentecostals.  In America, both the Pentecostals and the Baptists share
    practices, primarily because they were both born in the revivalism of
    early America.
    
    jeff

    The church I used to attend had Hollywood style extravaganzas for
    Christmas programs.  I purchased tickets for several customers who I
    knew were Christians or would enjoy the show.  (my own money not
    Digitals)
    
    Being in a SBC produced by a SBC of course there was an alter call at
    the end.  Several of these guests loved the program but were offended
    by the alter call because they felt it was to try and draw members from
    their churches to this particular church.  The 3 Lutherians I invited 
    were just plain shocked that this happened at a program where there was
    really no training or preparation.  They felt better afterwards when I
    told them when they went forward they were counsoled one on one for 1/2
    - 1 hour before any decision was made.
    
    Anyway once again I was made aware how narrow minded we can get, I've
    been in an evangilistic church since birth, and it never occured to me
    that other Christians would see anything wrong with it.  Upon more
    examination I realize that since I see 2-3 alter calls a week maybe
    some of the significance has been exchanged for tradition.  The reason
    I chose a Baptist Church over a Christian Church was because
    they performed the Lords Supper every week and I felt it took the
    significance away from it.
    
    Sparky

    
    Sparky,
    
    This, in my opinion, is one of the fundamental problems in
    evangelicalism today - their belief that mirroring the world (with
    extravaganzas of entertainment and such) with a Christian twist is
    acceptable and indeed required to get the lost into church so that they
    might be saved.
    
    I believe this is directly related to their (bad) theology.
    
    It is the duty of the church to preach the Word of God.  It is by
    hearing the Word and God's working through it that faith is conceived
    in the hearer.  It is simple.  It is fundamental.  Attempting to add
    to God's plan, as many evangelical churches are doing today, ends up, as
    always, watering it down and making it ineffective.
    
    BTW, the Lutherans may have been "offended" slightly by the altar call
    but it was probably a matter of sensibilities rather than a reflection
    of Godliness.
    
    jeff

    duno, Jeff - 
    
    I remember the outcry 20-some years ago when "Jesus Christ, Superstar"
    came out, what sacrelige!, etc.
    
    Then I heard that Handel's "Messiah" had received a similar reaction
    200 years ago...
    
    I wonder if all this isn't akin to our tendencies to argue over the
    petty things that separate us (must baptism be by immersion, etc.),
    instead of focusing on the great love of God that unites us?  
    
    If something, alter calls or whatever, "just ain't my style", but
    brings someone else closer to the Lord, can it be all bad?  Maybe I'm
    just mellowing with age...
    
    /John

    I have to defend Jesus Christ Superstar.  Yes it has some problems, but
    two of my friends, one very involved in prison ministry and another
    very involved in music ministries were basically saved by this record.

    Not that the record saved them, but liking the music, listening to it
    they finally became convicted to find out more about this.  I was the
    only person in our group who they knew was a Christian, (I did at least
    carry a Bible with me in school, not a lot of witnessing, but they knew
    I was available).  I wish I could say I was more instrumental in their
    actual salvation, but I basically directed them to the church I was
    going to where they made their decision.

    I am not sure what to believe about the big extravaganzas, I spent many
    an hour building floats (Electric Light Christmas Parade), Stage
    settings etc. for this Church; Second Baptist in Houston also called
    the Fellowship of Excitement.  You will hear testimony after testimony
    about how people found the Lord through this churches outreach.  A
    couple I know had major Drug Problems and had never been in a church. 
    That year we had built Candy houses, buildings all over the world made
    of candy, tons of it.  They were driving by stoned, and saw the sign
    and decided it would be a kick to see.  They were talked to, and left
    their phone numbers for a callback.  They are now very involved in the
    Youth ministry.

    A Jewish couple brought their kids to see the Electric Light Parade
    (like the one in Disney World only Christmas carol themes).  
    Their little boy waved to a person on the float playing Joseph, he
    smiled and waved back.  After that the boy kept saying he wanted to go
    to that place where Joseph smiled at him.  They started attending
    church and soon were saved.

    Similar testimonies are told over and over, regarding the Gym, the
    Aerobics ministry, Softball League, Programs etc.  

    Every year at this church the budget committee makes each "ministry"
    justify their existence to the church body, which is where most of
    these testimonies come from, but many are heard in SS classes, at work
    and all over town.  It is hard to argue with people being saved.

    I left because I felt called to be active in another church.  One thing
    Dr. Young always preaches is that to whom much is given much is
    required and to not get to comfortable at this church because when you
    have been taught and spiritually fed the Lord will require you to take
    this knowledge and wisdom to other churches that need it.

    The theory of this church is to get the people in with a hook, and then
    let the Lord work through his people to minister.

    Sparky 

    .204
    
    What is wrong with confrontational decisions.  In Catholic church
    spiritual counseling goes on in a confessional... In my church
    spiritual counseling goes in at the altar.  A woman counsels a woman, a
    man counsels a man... we deal with everything from confession of
    alcoholism, drugs, promiscuity of "Christians" to Salvation for the
    unsaved....  This doesn't happen in 5 minutes on your knees at the
    altar... that is only the beginning.  But the "step" to walk down the
    aisle is a relieving one...  
    
    Now, do I believe that an invitation must be given at every church
    event?  Yes, I do.  Does that mean the person *has* to walk down an
    aisle to receive Christ?  No, it doesn't.  It is an avenue, if they so
    choose it, but they also can talk with a Pastor or layperson they know
    after the service is over.  I know I'm always willing to spend the time
    with someone after a service that was too timid to boldly walk the
    aisle.
    
    I have a problem with Christian Music being used for the lining of
    pockets with dollars...  To me it represents the money changers in the
    temple.  They were selling religious items possibly, so what's the
    problem?  
    
    The problem is they did it for *their* personal gain, not for the
    souls of man.  Much of the so called "Christian Music" of the day's
    lyrics could either be a secular love ballad or a love ballad to the
    Lord... but the Lord isn't mentioned, so hey its bi-worldly.. it
    crosses over the line [imho].
    
    Then to couple it with the fact that an "invitation" or testimony of
    salvation isn't given is incredible to me.  I don't get it.  Music imho
    is edify the soul unto the Lord and bring people closer to Him... this
    happens through osmosis??????  I'm rambling...
    

    
    You're opinionated Nancy?  Naw!!
    
    I don't think I ever said there was anything wrong with "alter calls",
    did I?
    
    I respect your opinion immensely!
    
    Sparky, I respect your opinion as well!
    
    However, I am confident that evangelicals are missing the mark in their
    attempts to evangelize the world by being mostly like the world.
    
    Love y'all!
    jeff

    re: .206 and some others:
    
    For several years, I have had close association with the record
    industry, through my wife, who is an IS Manager.  The business is not
    nice, it is not Christian, it does not operate according to high
    ethical standards, forgive the term, but "sleaze" describes it best. 
    However, many of the recording artists are not a part of that "sleaze"
    or the money grubbing, etc.  We have not personally met any of the
    Christian Artists, but meeting others, it is apparent that they all
    have some latitude in what they do, how they conduct themselves, what
    occurrs at their concerts, etc.  Some artists are given "advice" by
    agents, managers, etc. and I am certain that they may decide that an
    altar call or personal testimony will cause them to be dropped, and
    their music will disappear and any chance to testify will be lost.  The
    sad part is that some of these people can make that happen, so an
    artist may feel that his/her ministry will be sharpley curtailed and
    maybe it is better to offer a watered-down version to more people.
    
    Also, Nancy, it almost sounds like you are not highly in favor of some
    great classical or other secular music.  I am not condoning some music,
    but there is beauty in the classics and jazz and some other music which
    is not Christian.  I guess I look at it this way, God created the
    entire earth and some of the most beautiful places in it, will not be
    used to build churches on, but they may inspire some people to seek the
    refuge of Jesus Christ.
    
    Nancy, you are not the only one given to rambling.

>    On the other hand, Billy Graham has done it for 
>    decades in huge venues.

Billy Graham has a well-organized mechanism, honed over the years.
His services are focused on the response, dove-tailing it all to
this culmination.

Christian concerts, generally, have the purpose of attracting diverse
people by the entertainment and music, and in this venue, the gospel seeds
are planted.  They may germinate elsewhere... and in fact, they should.

Billy Graham's invitation does NOT get a person to the point of salvation
and leave them; they link them up with a church and a follow-up.  I'll
be as bold to say that no Christian concert of the proportions we're talking
(in .190 et al) has the mechnisms in place to work with churches to handle
the newborns.  Giving birth to new Christians is a wonderful thing, but
tragic is the baby is left to nurture itself, or be raised by wolves. 

MM

    >Also, Nancy, it almost sounds like you are not highly in favor of
    >some great classical or other secular music.  I am not condoning some
    >music, but there is beauty in the classics and jazz and some other music
    >which is not Christian.  I guess I look at it this way, God created the
    >entire earth and some of the most beautiful places in it, will not
    >be used to build churches on, but they may inspire some people to seek
    >the refuge of Jesus Christ.
    
    Er, uh No.. I have an issue with CHRIST being used for personal gain.
    :-)  Classical music isn't labeled CHRISTIAN music, though Christians
    may listen to it.
    
    
    

    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    I respect Nancy's opinion and all others that have replied to this
    note.  While I don't find anything offensive with a alter call, when I
    go to a concert it is not something that is expected.  I came there to
    listen to music, and I believe that the music will touch peoples heart.  
    I remember in the 70's that concerts seemed to always have the alter
    call, but I also think its wrong (IMO) to criticize an artist because
    they don't have one.  Some people (like Glen Campbell perhaps?) are in
    it for the money only, but I thing its wrong to assume that because an
    artist doesn't have one that they are money hungry people that have
    gone astray.  I don't understand why you would turn against an artist
    regardless of his music because he doesn't have an A.C.    
    
    I'll be quiet now.  Back to discussion

Jeff>   However, I am confident that evangelicals are missing the mark in their
Jeff>   attempts to evangelize the world by being mostly like the world.
 
My father, in a letter to the Herald of Holiness (a Nazarene publication),
agrees with you but has expressed it differently.  I wish I had the text
with me.  Basically he said that we may indeed change the way the message
is presented, but the message remains the same.  In other words, as long
as God is first and the message in unaldulterated, it can be communicated
in the vernacular of just about any venue, include CCM and even Rock Bands,
if that's what it would take to communicate the message (opinions noted).
The revolting part comes when the message is watered down, skewed, twisted,
or altered to suit the views and agendas of the people of this generation.

Mark

    What's this about Glen Campbell being in it for the money?  Did I miss
    a note which detailed how this is true?
    
    Glen Campbell has a testimony of belief in Jesus Christ.  He has a life
    to match his testimony.  
    
    Let's not malign Glen Campbell's character, even accidentally.
    
    jeff

Nit with some of you:

Altar .ne. Alter; the former is a structure the later is a verb that means
  to modify or change.

    I had just mentioned Glen Campbell because another noter had, and he
    was the only person I could think of at the moment that I had
    personally questioned.  This in no way means he's not sincere.  Just
    that he was one artist that I had thought about in passing.
    
    
    Sorry for the confusion,
    
    Donna

> Altar .ne. Alter; 
    
    Mark, 
    
    Shouldn't that be the string operator ".nes." ?
    
    Grins/John

 RE Glen Campbell...



 While his past life may be checkered, he has in the last few years become
 a very committed Christian, something which will be discussed in his soon
 to be released autobiography.


 Re: Classical...Hey, I got hooked on classical music thanks to folks in this
 conference ;-)



 Jim

    yeah Glenn doesn't live too far from me.  One of these days I'm gonna
    teach him how to play through a Marshall stack.

    Donna,
    
    I agree with you FWIW.  My original question was how can we tell what
    CCM artists are real and which one's aren't.  I mentioned Glen
    Campbell [okay you can send me the flames], not because I thought it
    was true, but I was questioning his character based on his very VISUAL
    life.. and it *seems* he came to CHRISTIAN music after failing at
    reviving his worldy music career... *seems* folks... *seems*.
    
    

>    and it *seems* he came to CHRISTIAN music after failing at
>    reviving his worldy music career... *seems* folks... *seems*.
    
I, too, am tempted to make evaluations based on what seems to me to
be the case.  A lot of people come to Christ after failing at their
worldly endeavors.  Who knows for sure?

    
           
re: Note 86.220                  
>>    and it *seems* he came to CHRISTIAN music after failing at
>>    reviving his worldy music career... *seems* folks... *seems*.
    
>I, too, am tempted to make evaluations based on what seems to me to
>be the case.  A lot of people come to Christ after failing at their
>worldly endeavors.  Who knows for sure?
    
    I always want to believe that maybe the difficulties in life have led
    them to the Lord.  That their search to fill that missing void has lead
    them to Jesus Christ and now they sing His praises.  But, then I also
    know that for some that would not be true.  

    .221
    
    I was talking about the TRUST-FACTOR to my roommates the other day. 
    When I was growing up buying a used car from a stranger was safe for
    the most part.  Today, buying a used car from a stranger is as risky as
    unsafe sex!  Trust now must be earned, not freely given.  Sad, but
    true.....

    I'm just too old to change Nancy.  Even when it costs me money.  Did I
    tell you about the car I just bought from the guy that owns our
    building...

    Just F. Y. I. 
    
    Z music was bought by Gaylord Entertainment who also owns the 
    Opryland themepark and CMT (Country Music Television).  Gaylord
    bought and moved Z to Nashville, TN.  They expected the format 
    to change a little.  BTW-  Laurie Lynn one of the veejays, from
    when Z was in Florida, is now a deejay on one of the Christian 
    radio stations here in Nashville.  Also, she is expecting...
    
    

    What is she expecting? 

    A Little miracle...

    Information regarding many of today's Christian "artists" can be found
    at the following URL: http://www.av1611.org/crock.html. 
    
    Bob