Contemporary Worship Music

[Zaphod B]

Hmmmm....pretty slow fishing around here......

 

[soundchaser59]

that just makes it sound not like a real song, but a song written by some dork such as yourself?

Why, Thank You, that's very flattering! I'll back off now that I've reached and exceeded your tolerance level.... my apologies!

Go have another beer or three.... on me!

Then continue being excellent to each other!

 

[Big Kenny]

Actually, the Christian rockers are recording and writing far better music than the rest of the genres. They write in every category and some of the stuff is very nice while some is trite and plagarized. Not too much different than any other group really.

 

[Fusioninspace]

I'm really impressed that this thread ended up getting so many replies.

My original intention was only to get some non-church people perhaps interested in going to church - the thought being that if you didn't have to deal with the hymn based songs, you might be moved by the newer stuff.

The bottom line is that our relationship with Christ is an individual one and one that can take many paths to meet him. I'm 48, a sinner just like everyone else, but it took me until about 43-ish to get the real picture. And it took several exposures to the "contemporary" services to realize that maybe I need to pay attention.

I pray that whatever us musicians do, it's not a distraction from opening our hearts (or turning other hearts onto) to Jesus and getting his message of love and forgiveness.

For myself, I found that writting songs about my relationship with Christ forced me to really dig into the word and to think about what I was thinking. It's probably similar to "journaling" that some people practice.

Today's assignment: Write lyrics about your relationship with Jesus. But don't tell anyone or post them... It's just between you and Him.

 

[Beck]

Music is a language... a way to communicate. Christians speak with contemporary music just as the Apostle Paul used the common language of the people to build the early church. It is no more surprising that a young Christian artist would be influenced by popular music anymore than it would surprise anyone that popular music influences secular artists.

All churches won’t be the same, and I personally miss the high church music I was raised with.

Some contemporary Christian music can seem lame, but it reaches others that are more familiar and comfortable with a certain sound. I tolerate it, just as I do movies and TV aimed at various groups. It can’t all be for me… even though IMO I have better musical taste, and everyone would be better, smarter, deeper, if they liked what I liked.

One thing I do think is largely missing is a creative force in the church to break with the status quo and blaze new trails in music.

But then praise & worship music, and contemporary Christian music aren’t the same thing, though there is some crossover between the two.

 

[mixmkr]

I'm really impressed that this thread ended up getting so many replies.

My original intention was only to get some non-church people perhaps interested in going to church - the thought being that if you didn't have to deal with the hymn based songs, you might be moved by the newer stuff.

I kinda of look thru a weird eye with that comment. I completely understand your motives, but think letting people really know who God is will do the deed much better... and to clarify, there AINT gonna be ANYTHING that you nor I can do to win people over to Jesus. We just let Him use us as tools, nuttin more. If we think WE can win people to Jesus (and I am assuming coming to church is the tactic), we become as influential as God...eh? I'm just a dude in which without God's grace am nothing. I believe we are just to be a good witness and let others see how blessed He has made us. If playing a kick-butt backline in church with some high-dollar gear at 105dB shows a blessing to others (in which, btw I do at my church), so be it. But the Holy Spirit is the Man with the abilities. I personally prefer to tailor my worship as He would have it... not the way I would.

God bless brother... good thread.

 

[rayc]

How about hiding the overtly blah lyrics so that they only appear when played backward so it can be seen as naughty & therefor interesting?
OR putting all of the cliche's & stock phrases into a barrel & burying it to force lyricist/writers to use fresher combinations of syllables to express ideas.
Oh, that goes for ALL music, not just the current topic.
Reggae - "So Jah seh" in one track & "...them belly full but we hungry, a hungry mob is an angry mob" on the next. Passion, belief & social awareness not compromised by conservatism, convention or a strong alternative market in the U.S.

 

[c7sus]

This thread could use some lesbians right about now.

 

[Codmate]

I'm really impressed that this thread ended up getting so many replies.

My original intention was only to get some non-church people perhaps interested in going to church

Why?

Oh I forgot - Christians are inherently better than me and I should try and be more like them.

- the thought being that if you didn't have to deal with the hymn based songs, you might be moved by the newer stuff.

The bottom line is that our relationship with Christ is an individual one

My relationship with the FSM is an individual one, but I don't go on about it and try to convert people...

and one that can take many paths to meet him. I'm 48, a sinner just like everyone else,

Oh - here we go...

but it took me until about 43-ish to get the real picture. And it took several exposures to the "contemporary" services to realize that maybe I need to pay attention.

I pray that whatever us musicians do, it's not a distraction from opening our hearts (or turning other hearts onto) to Jesus and getting his message of love and forgiveness.

For myself, I found that writting songs about my relationship with Christ forced me to really dig into the word and to think about what I was thinking. It's probably similar to "journaling" that some people practice.

Today's assignment: Write lyrics about your relationship with Jesus

I don't have one thanks - and I don't need one. There is only scant evidence that the guy even existed.

. But don't tell anyone or post them... It's just between you and Him.

Here's an assignment for you.
Go read "The God Delusion".

 

[faderbug]

... strong alternative market in the U.S.

they've been scanning european markets for years now and christian rock cd's (approved by the commander and chief) are starting to emerge on flemish and dutch shopping channels - 'after overwelming success in the united states'.

people buy them too.

oh yes, i worry ...

 

[sile2001]

There is only scant evidence that the guy even existed.

Actually there is extensive evidence that he existed, and it is generally accepted by historians that a man named Jesus did live at that time and "started a religion". The argument that's always up in the air is the divinity of Jesus.

 

[Codmate]

Actually there is extensive evidence that he existed, and it is generally accepted by historians that a man named Jesus did live at that time and "started a religion". The argument that's always up in the air is the divinity of Jesus.

Entirely incorrect.

There is NO substantial evidence.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

It is ALL heresay.

This is not the place to argue about it - I suggest you register here if you fancy your chances:
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/

 

[faderbug]

Actually there is extensive evidence that he existed, and it is generally accepted by historians that a man named Jesus did live at that time and "started a religion". The argument that's always up in the air is the divinity of Jesus.

btw he was just one of the many prophets in those days.

all claiming tho spread the word of god and the 'one universal truth'.

muslims also recognise jesus, he is one of the prophets in the koran. they do see him as a secundary figure though, the 'real' messenger from god being mohamed.

people have a rich imagination!

 

[cephus]

Didn't you write a song and have a line in it that just makes it sound not like a real song, but a song written by some dork such as yourself? I have.

Why, Thank You, that's very flattering! I'll back off now that I've reached and exceeded your tolerance level.... my apologies!

You left off the most important part. What are ya, a replublican?

See, now I'm getting nasty.

I was trying to point out that your perspective is different when you're a songwriter. If you just jot down every word that gets your point across without regard to rhythm or rhyme or number of syllables, etc, it's not a song. You have to craft the words. And part of that is trying not to use certain words that will distract the listener.

I can't think of an example of a shitty one, because those songs don't make it. One almost example is Rick Springfield using "moot" in "Jessy's girl". We cut him some slack because the line he's rhyming is "I feel so dirty when they start talking cute" instead of "She's so purty and she's so cute" like a shitty songwriter would do.

I am not running down the institution of music created in honor/tribute/praise of God. I just think that, unfortunately, the guys that are doing it have very obviously failed to make it in mainstream music and see it as a leg-up to a career. In other words, I think they exploit Jesus so they can pretend to be rock stars. I think it's far more honorable to be a rock star trying to find a way to praise Jesus through his music.

 

[travelin travis]

In other words, I think they exploit Jesus so they can pretend to be rock stars. I think it's far more honorable to be a rock star trying to find a way to praise Jesus through his music.

BINGO!!!!!

 

[rory]

Actually there is extensive evidence that he existed, and it is generally accepted by historians that a man named Jesus did live at that time and "started a religion". The argument that's always up in the air is the divinity of Jesus.

Like L. Ron Hubbard???????????????

 

[mshilarious]

Entirely incorrect.

There is NO substantial evidence.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

It is ALL heresay.

This is not the place to argue about it - I suggest you register here if you fancy your chances:
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/

The Jesus Seminar published a "red/pink/grey/black" letter text version of the Gospel, indicating their relative assurance of the authenticity of various Gospel passages attributed to Jesus. I suspect the scholarship of a wide-ranging secular biblical panel of experts is better than what you'd find on an internet discussion board.

Anyway, history does not use the same standard of evidence as a court of law, so the premise of that link is somewhat silly. Not to mention that it contains much conjecture that would be objected to and most likely excluded from testimony in a legal environment, so the argument has a serious problem with consistency.

 

[Big Kenny]

The Jesus Seminar published a "red/pink/grey/black" letter text version of the Gospel, indicating their relative assurance of the authenticity of various Gospel passages attributed to Jesus. I suspect the scholarship of a wide-ranging secular biblical panel of experts is better than what you'd find on an internet discussion board.

Anyway, history does not use the same standard of evidence as a court of law, so the premise of that link is somewhat silly. Not to mention that it contains much conjecture that would be objected to and most likely excluded from testimony in a legal environment, so the argument has a serious problem with consistency.

That may be the most well expressed thought in this thread, thanks.

 

[Codmate]

The Jesus Seminar published a "red/pink/grey/black" letter text version of the Gospel, indicating their relative assurance of the authenticity of various Gospel passages attributed to Jesus. I suspect the scholarship of a wide-ranging secular biblical panel of experts is better than what you'd find on an internet discussion board.

Anyway, history does not use the same standard of evidence as a court of law, so the premise of that link is somewhat silly. Not to mention that it contains much conjecture that would be objected to and most likely excluded from testimony in a legal environment, so the argument has a serious problem with consistency.

So you would be OK with being convicted of murder on heresay?
That's good enough evidence for you?

The Jesus Seminar is totally falacious IMO, as they start with the assumption that Jesus existed. As well as this, the 'Jesus' they say existed, is totally contradictory to the one people tend to believe in as the 'Son Of God'.

From Wikipedia:
"The seminar's reconstruction of Jesus portrays him as a wandering sage who did not found a religion or rise from the dead, but preached in startling parables and aphorisms, often turning common ideas upside down and confounding the expectations of his audience."

I would argue that "The Jesus Seminar" aren't even discussing Jesus as we know it.

This is a lot like the way theists often change their definition of their chosen deity during the course of an argument.

Basically - unless you can provide me with physical evidence, or written testomony of actual witnesses (Gospels do not count - as can be easily shown from the evidence in http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm), I see no good reason to believe the man existed, let alone base my entire life around his supposed teachings (actually decided upon by by various catholic councils, such as The First Council of Constantinople).

Lets not have a theological argument on a guitar forum though.
If you want to argue with scholars about this - there are actually many eminent people hanging out at http://richarddawkins.net/forum/

As such I shan't be replying to any more posts on this forum concerning this...

My handle on the Richard Dawkins forum is the same as here, and you would be more than welcome to start, or join in an existing debate, about the authenticity of cited 'evidence' of Jesus' existance there.

 

[apl]

So you would be OK with being convicted of murder on heresay?
That's good enough evidence for you?

It's spelled hearsay.

And it's not hearsay if Person A says they saw Person B do something.

There's an awful lot of history that we take as fairly certain that you wouldn't believe with your standard.