RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: The trouble of uninspired "worship" songs
- Reasonable questions, Ben, so let me try to answer them. I think Ginny's
question is similar.
From: Ben Hart [mailto:benhartmail@...]
> Why must we learn all 150 psalms before we learn to appreciate genuinelygood secular music?
Please keep in mind my qualifier, *for recreation, entertainment and
enjoyment*. What I am talking about here is not something we need to
fulfill our obligation "to labor 6 days", or other such Biblical
obligations. We are not here discussing songs suited for those ends.
Now, with respect to recreation, its God-ordained purpose is to re-create
and re-vivify us, spiritually and physically. There is simply *no song* so
pure and so effectual to that end as those songs which God has inspired.
But if you disagree, please name that song.
Again, we must keep in mind our time limits on this earth. It is quite
limited. And that brief time we have for recreation in song should be well
used. Christians have been bought with a price. Our time is God's.
>Perhaps an analogy or a relevant ad hominem makes my point - you haven'trequired your kids to memorize/thoroughly read the Bible before
reading other books have you?
No, because then we would be violating scriptural principles such as
laboring 6 days, and considering the teaching of godly men on the
scriptures, etc. Let's take the first, for example. To labor often entails
reading things such as instructional manuals on equipment, etc.
But with respect to songs *for entertainment and recreation*, God has given
us the songs we are to meditate upon.
I just wish I could trade all the secular songs I know (from my pre-reformed
days) in for the spiritual songs God wrote. But, alas, the secular songs
are deeply embedded in my psyche from youth, and God's songs I am trying
only somewhat successfully to learn in my older age. My advice to the
youth: remember the Creator's songs in the days of thy youth. (And don't
waste time meditating upon the words of *at best* second-rate songs written
by mere men, often foolish men at that.)
>Maybe you have, but I think when thesame logic is applied there, it shows the intuitive overzealousness
of such an idea.
>How is it a mis-priority of time to play and learn other songs forentertainment before memorizing the Psalms?
Because they are not as effectual as God's songs at achieving the purposes
for which God has given us re-creation.
- Parnell McCarter
- No problem, Jasper. You get the benefit of the doubt around here, as
far as I'm concerned. Thanks for saying this, though.
--- In email@example.com, Jasper
> Jerry,intend them to be offensive. I thought I was adding something to the
> I am sorry if my comments seemed offensive to you - I did not
discussion as it stood at that point.
>listening to a song in other contexts.
> Overall, the discussion was interesting.
> gmw <raging.calvinist@v...> wrote:
> Perhaps some confusion is removed if you...
> 1. Don't confuse me with someone who speaks officially for all
> Covenanters. I am not a teacher, preacher, or elder.
> 2. Distinguish between using a song in the act of worship, and
>anyone at the stake. LOL.
> 3. Don't confuse the advocating of Exclusive Psalmody with burning
>extolled the virtues of various secular rock groups such as Kansas,
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jasper
> <jasperh98@y...> wrote:
> > I recall that on various occasions the forum owner here has
while verbally "burning at the stake" all christians who sing to God
praises that are not from a Presbyterian-approved version of the
Psalms. Gets a bit confusing. I wonder if Blind Willie Johnson is a
> (see this group's files section)?a "Christian Contemporary Musician" doesn't mean there is some
> > Jasper
> > Maggie Conley <mmpconley@s...> wrote:
> I agree Ben. This was going to be my response.
> Just because they hold themselves to the designation of being
Eleventh Commandment that says they are required to only sing Praise
and Worship songs.
>Luther they can sing whatever they want unto the Lord. So long
> Just like the cobbler in the famous story told about Martin
as it's contents are not defamatory to the Lord and/or good Doctrine.
>uninspired "worship" songs
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Hart [mailto:benhartmail@y...]
> > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 5:45 AM
> > To: email@example.com
> > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: The trouble of
>one - it was originally written by a group from the 80's named
> For better or for worse, I think Sixpence is in the clear on this
Crowded House. I don't think they intended for it to be a worship
song. Other artists who are Christians have covered secular songs
just because they like the tune, lyrics, etc. Jennifer Knapp did
Shawn Colvin's "Diamond in the Rough", Caedmon's Call did U2's "In
God's Country" and the Supertones did Cindy Lauper's "Time after
Time" just for a few examples. I'd be pretty shocked to think
Sixpence considered it a worship song. Was it played during a
designated 'praise and worship'?
> Is there something wrong with Christian's playing secular songs?
> > ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'