Hah, well, I didn't say that, so I won't bother defending it. But my intuition would lead me to believe that no, it probably won't.
Sorry, I didn't mean that
you said that. That's one of the defenses supporters of "Christian" rock use.
... Mind you, my intuition would also lead me to believe that no sort of fancy music (or any other gimmicks) would draw in non-believers. For that, you need a message that is true and actually reflects reality. But that's an entirely different topic. :P
I always thought the purpose of religious music was to be another form of "worship".
That is one purpose, yes. We have many songs that praise and thanks to God for Who He is and for what He has done, and will do. That's always included.
It also prepares the heart and mind for further worship and for the preaching of the Gospel.
It's also a way to express the Scriptures in musical form, such as how people used the Psalms in previous centuries.
Well, I still don't understand what is intrinsically "non-biblical" about the "sound" of Christian rock, or any other music, honestly.
The intrinsic rhythm and beat of rock music appeals sensually to the flesh. (Perhaps I can go into more detail when I get home from work late tonight.)
It seems similar to claiming that English or ASL is a "non-biblical" language, and thus no preaching in that language can be "True Preaching" regardless of the message.
No, that's not the same thing at all. There is no non-biblical language. There is non-biblical content and non-biblical methods that preachers might use that would be wrong.
If anything, it is Christians who want to put the Bible into as many languages as possible, and it is Christians who support literacy to make the Bible as accessible as possible.
Well, okay. Here you're getting into semantics about individual beliefs, so I'll defer on that ground, since I think almost all biblical beliefs (in regards to the supernatural like what you referenced, rather than some generic moral beliefs, like your comment about kiddie porn) are contrived and meaningless.
Fair enough.
However, I'm sure you can easily think of a Christian rock song that has what you consider "biblically accurate" lyrics. So, for the rest of this, pretend like we're only talking about songs which are "right", lyrically.
Umm, no, I can't think of any "Christian" rock songs that have biblically accurate lyrics. Of course, I don't know the lyrics to every song written.
I'm not really sure that using a handheld microphone, gyrating (really? Like the complaints about Elvis in the '50s?),
Elvis was a secular performer on a stage, singing for money. I'm not commenting on that. The discussion is about
Christian music. Totally not relevant.
or strongly emoting necessarily causes the focus to be on the self, rather than the subject of the song (in this case, God). It could simply be that the singer would not be truly expressing their feelings towards God accurately if they had to stand still in front of a stationary microphone and not move while singing.
They do it all the time.
The content of the song is enough to stir hearts and minds.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible to both "praise God" and be appreciative of the performer at the same time?
One can appreciate the efforts of the performer without applause. Church isn't a theater or sports stadium.
Requiring audience responses to match the format of the very stereotypical Southern Baptist call/response to be "true responses" equally seems limiting, since not everyone who feels the "true response" of praise/worship will necessarily express that in that manner.
The audience isn't required to respond in any certain way; I said those were
examples. I've never been a member of a Southern Baptist church, so I can't say what they do or not do during their services.
Fair enough, but I'd be willing to bet that a lot of Christian rock is also written by believers. Again, as with the lyrics, feel free to pretend like the stuff written and performed by non-believers doesn't count - that certainly doesn't exclude all or even the majority of Christian rock.
I don't make or take bets.
It's possible that believers are involved in "Christian" rock. Many believers, especially new ones, are involved in lots of things that they don't know the full truth about. That doesn't make it OK.
I was asked why I was bothered by it, and I've given my explanation. That's all. Mine is just another perspective on the issue.
I'm sure at least some people who enjoy Christian rock do react that way. Someone who is more comfortable and familiar with Christian rock than, say, Gregorian chant (not me, mind you) might find the message from a Christian rock song more "clear" than other forms of music. That's why there are many different kinds of music.
People do have different comfort levels. The only time I hear Gregorian chants are when they're included in a TV program or movie.
Right, my question was more, is there anything inherent to these instruments that your church doesn't use, that precludes their usage from True Christian Music?
The instrumentation of the songs we use at church wouldn't fit with rock-style instruments. Different instruments suit different kinds of music. Some are flexible to many forms, such as the piano, and some are not.
There is also the relationship of certain instruments to certain kinds of music. Most people can identify what a rock band set up looks like.
(And if so, would you also say there might be some languages, which because of some feature of the language, precludes its usage from True Preaching as well?)
I can't think of any, other than some languages don't have the vocabulary that includes specific religious terms. That, however, can be worked out. Do you have something specific in mind?
