I am curious as to what “human-love oriented” refers to. I do notice that in many songs, if the word “Jesus” were replaced by “baby”, you’d have a pretty good Top 40 song, so that might be “human-love oriented”.

That is what I took from the lady’s comment. She found it too familiar, rather than offensive. In that, she was just uncomfortable with it. I heard a similar sentiment from a couple of others. I must also add that these were all people in a demographic group over the age of 40. Nonetheless it merited mention.

Even if they dug up a hymn written by St.Peter himself, it wouldn’t be necessarily better than a song written last week.
…
It’s strangely comforting to know that they had lousy hymns back then too.

Amen to both. Again, I think that it is question of preference in most cases. I definitely have my preferences and they are not held my many people. Neither preference is valid in an objective sense. Sounds shockingly like relativism, but with the exception of heretical or diss-respectful content, that is what preferential areas are and likely the one place they are relatively harmless (though I have to think about it some more).

I am curious as to what “human-love oriented” refers to. I do notice that in many songs, if the word “Jesus” were replaced by “baby”, you’d have a pretty good Top 40 song, so that might be “human-love oriented”. On the other hand, I don’t honestly think I can conceive of any love other than human love, which is why we say “the Son” and “our Father”, “the Bridegroom”. I suspect he’s partially right in his critique, but then again, I’m sure some were put off by Jesus always referring to God as “dad”, when perfectly good titles like “Sovereign Lord of Hosts” were available.

As far as the age of our hymns, this is irrelevant. First off, my wife’s definition of “old hymn” is “like, from the 70’s”. Even if they’re from the 1670’s, they are still relatively modern. Older music tends to sound slow and grating on the ears. We certainly shouldn’t be distracted by the antiquated music, which is all it would do. Even if they dug up a hymn written by St.Peter himself, it wouldn’t be necessarily better than a song written last week.

I may be wrong about this, but Paul quotes a strange line “Rise up, Sleeper and let Christ’s light shine on you”, which sounds to me like it comes from a hymn (or maybe a common prayer). It’s strangely comforting to know that they had lousy hymns back then too.

Actually, I only put the music point in there for completeness, not realizing it would draw attention. Overall I think it is a point of preference. Though studying it might be interesting, whether casting a result as correct is a matter for discussion.

Of more significance to the current discussion, if the foundational side is in place, then the music will reflect that understanding, in whatever for it is expressed. It it is not, then the worship style becomes a moot issue.

If you worship in whatever style on the parapets of a castle built on sand, then when the tide shifts it will be washed away irregardless. Likewise, if you are on the castle with a foundation of the rock of Scripture, then it will not.

In terms of the mode of expression of love specifically, as voiced by a fellow believer, that would be an area for examination. The fact that life long believers object to the point of non-participation at least merits a hearing.

I think that this might merit a new thread…

As to the love expression of some church music being too human love oriented, I will have to think about that, and do some research. But this does bring to light something I have been thinking about over the past couple of years. I think there is a common lack of understanding as to what worship actually _is_. Most Christians can tell tell you it’s good to worship God, and we do so because He is worthy. A good number will even tell you that worship includes, but is not limited to, song. They may be able to list a few attributes of worship, but few will be able to give a good definition of what worship is.

Perhaps we need some good, group study (Biblically based, of course) on what worship actually is, or what it’s supposed to be, and what some examples are (including a certain king of Israel dancing before the Lord). Only with a full understanding, including an operational definition, of what worship is can we intelligently debate that which we’ve been debating here. Then we can understand of some love music really is disrespectful or not. Going back to that certain king of Israel, I think a number of Bapti^H^H^H^H^Hpeople might think of some of his stuff to be disrespectful, but he’s one of the best pictures of Jesus that appears in the Bible, and the history of the world. Incidentally, he’s also credited with writing a great number of the Psalms.

For myself, I think that many of the current songs are wonderful. They appeal to me strongly. I would like a tad more theology in some cases and that is where the more traditional hymns in the mix come it. Some of the modern ones I personally would class as ‘in the car’ music rather that in the service, but that is just my preference.

As to “who care?”, well many do, including me. One common complaint about modern lyrics is that they use endless, and as a result possibly mindless, repetition. In some cases I would have to agree. I have occasionally thought “great song, but please end it before I go to sleep”. Without some meat in there for the mind that is what happens for many people. But I grant that your mileage may vary.

Another interesting comment that was made to me by a mature (but not old) church attendee brought up something that I had not thought about. They said that the tone of some modern songs was too human love oriented, and that they found it disrespectful in terms of addressing the Lord. They felt quite strongly that it moved from the love of the Lord to the love of ones human sweet heart. They found this inappropriate in tone. They did not sing in the congregation on those songs. A few questions indicated that they were not totally alone in this evaluation. I am not championing this view but I do see it, and it can not simply be dismissed.

Lots to think about.

I agree with the first point, and would say that worship music is a subset of all that is worship. On top of that, I’ll say that Christian music intersects with all that is worship.

Most church-attenders make a distinction between “old hymns” and the “new stuff.” A couple of years ago I realized that this distinction was trivial at best, and it’s a head space we need to get out of in order to think clearly about church music. One reason is that at one time the old hymns were considered the “new stuff.”

Even though your wife may know, academically, that you love her, she still wants to be told periodically. And it’s probably a good practice for a husband to be in to tell his wife how he feels, and to do so frequently. If we take the model of church music and apply it here, there are two ways to do this. One way is to tell a friend, hoping your wife overhears. The other way is to tell her directly. Now, I’m not even remotely married, so I’ll leave it up to you to tell me which you think would go over better.

Furthermore, when telling your wife how you feel about her, how much you love her, do you list her attributes? “Oh, sweetheart. You’re 5′6″, you have brown hair down to your shoulders, with a 7 to 10 waist to hip ratio. On your right hand, your index finger is longer than your ring finger, and your purse goes very well with your shoes!” (I think I missed the Bryan Adams love song where he does that.)

I learned that a much better distinction to make when considering music for church is songs that are “about God” and songs that are “to God.” A lot of the “old hymns” have wonderful theology, but it occurrs to me “WHO CARES?!”

For my own personal worship time, I would take my guitar out and pour out my heart before God. Then I realized half the time I was just singing about God, and hoping He overheard. (I love the song “It Is Well”, it’s got some good theology, but it didn’t seem to fit the purpose.) Other times, I would sing a song that was pretty light on theology, but fit the purpose perfectly. (The song “I Love You, Lord” really doesn’t have any theology, but doesn’t it just say it all?) I tell ya, there’s nothing like playing a song like “Hallelujah, You Love Is Amazing”, looking out into the congregation and seeing people, with hands lifted up, eyes closed, absolutely lost in worship, in the presence of God, and worshiping with all their hearts.

You can tell when I pick music for a Sunday morning. The first set will be songs about God, and the second set will be songs to God. I think that that’s an appropriate response to a sermon.

Not that I have anything against theology in church music. And I would have an issue with a song with incorrect theology. I just don’t see theology as being the main point of worship music.

Also notice, I don’t use the terms “worship music” and “church music” interchangeably. “Worship music” is music for worshiping God, and “church music” is music we either sing in church, or could concievably sing in church, whether it’s “worship music” or a song about how happy I am to be saved, and how I must pass it on.

/rant

Gee….if I keep leaving comments this long I’ll have to start my own blog

On the second, I would also agree. There are a number for Reformed Presbyterian churches that sing only Psalms. Though I am not sure I would go that far and would miss other music, I do find that in general many of the old hymns are more meaty and theologically meaningful and sound. Though many newer songs convey the emotional experience, they are lacking in substance for a steady diet and for real understanding.

In both cases, but particularly the second, we return to the substitution of the moments of experience for solid knowledge. Though the experiential moments are certainly significant, as the only foundation they a dangerous foundation to build upon and unlikely to withstand serious tribulation.

I would also like to see more music taken directly from the psalter. These are songs given to us by God, hundreds of them. Why do we consistently choose songs written by men, and modern men at that? Even if the newer songs are inspired by Biblical texts, which most are, is this not the same question as whether we’re “of” the Bible or “about” the Bible? Is God not catchy enough anymore?