Tag Archives: culture
It’s no New York City. And yet, it’s no New York City. Heck, it’s not even Atlanta or Seattle, but you can actually afford to live here. You can get a great education that won’t take you decades or the life of your first born to pay back. Some of the best espresso drinks you’ve ever had will cost you less than $3. And though it’s a small, midwestern city, thanks to its several universities and colleges, there’s plenty of diversity to explore as well. There’s only a few spots in this great country of ours where you can find street preachers, massive belt buckles, boots, hipsters, skateboarders, folks of the more friendly variety holding hands, and topless women (no joke) all within steps of the same city square–Springfield is definitely a card carrying member of that very small, exclusive club. It also won’t take you more than 20 minutes to get anywhere in town you may want to go, but you’ll be pleasantly surprised on how many even more intriguing finds you’ll pass on the way there.
Yeah, it’s no Los Angeles or Miami, and the closest swimmable beach may be more than 600 miles away, but you’ll find some of the nation’s finest lakes and fishing just minutes from town. It’s probably no surprise, then, that this “Queen City” is also home to Bass Pro Shops. But if you’re not the outdoorsy type–no worries, as there’s plenty to do inside as well. Hammons Hall serves as home to the Springfield Symphony Orchestra and an impressive selection of traveling Broadway theater presentations as well as community arts initiatives and performances featuring talent from Missouri State and the surrounding collegiate community. This small Bible Belt city is also home to a community theater and event center called The Shrine Mosque (though it’s history is tied to the Masonic lodge, not to Islam). Not to be forgotten is the 11,000 seat John Q. Hammons Arena that serves as a home to Missouri State athletics as well as a host of other entertainment events. The historic Gillioz Theater, restored in 2006, has become another magnet for great entertainment events and concerts. The new O’Reilly Family Events Center on the campus of Drury University serves as the home of the Drury Panthers and another venue for select events and concerts throughout the year. The 8,000 seat Hammons Field serves as the home of the Springfield Cardinals, the AA Texas League affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals. Evangel University is also home to a couple performance venues of note including the Ashcroft Activities Center and Evangel Chapel. And last, but not least, is the 3,500 seat (4,000+ for concerts) W. E. Dowell Fieldhouse on the campus of Baptist Bible College (also known to students as “Life Change U”) that serves as the home of BBC Patriot Athletics. It boasts a new state-of-the-art fitness facility and also serves as home to the annual “Fellowship Week” meeting of the Baptist Bible Fellowship. Needless to say, with all of the venues available (and I’m sure I missed a few), there is no shortage of events or entertainment in my new hometown.
Also serving as the headquarters of two significant Christian denominations (Assemblies of God & BBFI), there is no shortage of houses of worship. Here you’ll find everything from small, country-style churches that have been around for decades as well as large, flagship representatives of their denominations (High Street and James River are examples) and everything in between. The culture wars are also alive and well in Springfield. As home to a large state university (25,000+); a progressive, youthful population; and plenty of representation from that “old time religion”, my new hometown can be an interesting clash of cultures. If you’re looking for a good place to see where both extremes of the culture wars clash and, interestingly enough, seemingly coexist–Springfield is a great study (and example, perhaps) in many aspects of modern sociology.
Springfield boasts a strong economic engine with a diversity of employment opportunities in healthcare, education, transportation, manufacturing, telecommunication and finance. In addition to the sizable employment available through the Queen City’s multiple educational systems, it also serves as the headquarters for Prime Trucking, O’Reilly Auto Parts, Bass Pro Shops, the Cox and Mercy Health Systems as well as a number of call centers for the telecommunications and finance industry. With all that, the area also boasts one of the lowest unemployment rates in the region (currently 4.7%) and nearly one full percentage point lower than the current national average.
One of the most understated benefits to the region is a diverse and equally interesting topography. Being from New England (not known for its large, open spaces), I find the large open spaces to give a sense of unlimited potential in proportion to all that available sky. Being well situated in the Midwest, there’s no shortage of wide open plains, but yet, sitting on the northern foothills of the Ozarks, while they’re no Rockies, there’s plenty of vertical to climb and explore as well. You also have to love the 4 seasons weather. There’s a little something for everyone, and if the old saying is true, “if you don’t like the weather, just stick around a day or two, it will change”–Springfield embodies that old saying as well as anyplace I’ve ever lived.
You can hardly mention Springfield without thinking about some of the most unique dining establishments you’ll find anywhere. Of course there’s the long standing Lambert’s (home of “throwed rolls”-literally, they throw them at you). Then there’s an instant classic that’s hit the city in the last couple years called Hurts Donuts. I can promise you, you’ve never seen a donut shop quite like this. Located in downtown Springfield, just one block from the square, you’ll find the most unique sugar saturated concoctions you’ve ever seen including a trademark bacon/maple donut (yes, you read that correctly–go ahead read it again and now confess that lustful fantasy). And if you’re looking for burger dives, Springfield has to be on the top of the list. With places like Grad School (yes, that’s the name of the joint) and its signature “Full Ride”, and Casper’s famous Chili Cheeseburger, you can’t go wrong (except for the screeching sound of your arteries slamming shut). If I’ve already made you hungry, check out 417 Magazine’s annual “best of” for more tantalizing tastes with some more upscale and healthier options including some leading “farm to table” features as well. With over 1,000 restaurants in the area, even the pickiest should be able to find something to purr about.
With all of that said, my favorite part of this surprising little city is its people. The people of Springfield come from a variety of backgrounds and in many ways embody the best of what the Midwest, the Southwest and the South have to offer. I’ve found the people here to be friendly without being syrupy (being from New England, syrupy is still hard to get used to), confident without being arrogant, as well as possessing a quiet contentment while being enterprising and innovative in creating better lives for themselves and their community. I’m glad to call Springfield home, and if you could see what I see, I think you would too.
If you’ve lived or visited Springfield before, what are some of your favorite places and memories? What would you say is most attractive about your hometown?
For more detailed information on what this great city has to offer, visit http://www.liveinspringfieldmo.com/ and enjoy this short video.
Culture is often defined as the attitudes, beliefs and customs of a group of people. While attitudes and beliefs shape the culture, it is primarily the customs that help to identify it. It is these “customs” (actions) that ultimately fuel the culture wars that exist in our world today. In light of the recent “flag” issue and especially, the recent Obergefell same-sex marriage case in the Supreme Court, I’ve been thinking on how people of faith can do a better job of engaging culture in a time where, in many cases, we seem to have lost our relevance.
Since the mentioned ruling, my social media feeds have looked like the Confederacy went to war with a Skittles factory (I’m sure you’ve seen the memes as well). We all have strong feelings on these issues and I don’t assume that all of us even share the same views. However, regardless of our view, if we want to help shape the behaviors of people that believe and act differently than our particular “tribe”, then we may want to think about how we engage and influence the culture around us (especially if you find your “side” in the minority, something that many Evangelicals today are having a hard time getting used to).
In the story of Daniel in the Bible (Daniel chapter 1), we observe a young man who suddenly found himself in the minority of a hostile government. Daniel willingly subjected himself to much of the culture of his new authority, but for some reason (not explicitly stated in the text), he felt that partaking of the meat and wine allotted to him would “defile” him. He had a strong faith in God and a strong personal conviction that went contrary to the culture he suddenly found himself in. So what did he do? He set out a challenge with the king’s chief of staff of whom he had already found favor (might I add, probably not by demanding his “rights”). He chose a different diet of vegetables and water and suggested that the king’s assistant observe Daniel and his friends for 10 days and see if they were not at least as strong and healthy as those who were served the king’s diet. As the story goes, at the end of 10 days, Daniel and his friends indeed appeared stronger and healthier than their peers. Because of this, they were permitted to continue on their selected diet while the others continued with the king’s demands. I think there are a few simple lessons here that could help people of faith better engage a culture that may seem increasingly hostile to it.
1. Work for the Common Good
Daniel’s objection was personal, not political. What Daniel did not do, may say more about his “excellent spirit” than even what he did. Daniel did not start out by protesting how “defiled” the king’s food was or how wicked the people were that ate it. Daniel did not demand that everyone else also believe or behave (eat) as he did (even after his diet proved more advantageous). He did not say “I told you so” when he was right. He did not rally a protest campaign among his buddies against the “king’s meat”. He simply lived and illustrated Micah 6:8 as he “acted justly, loved mercy, and walked humbly with his God.”
Daniel appealed to the common good of his captors. When we appeal to the common good of all people, it checks our motives and gives us a platform for influence. The king gave a decree for a reason and Daniel was submissive to that (political/common good) reason until it caused him to bring (personal) defilement upon himself. I’m sure he must have grown nostalgic for the “better days” of Zion and must have been uncomfortable living within the culture and confines of his new found pagan kingdom, yet, he submitted himself willingly to it’s authority for the common good with one personal exception. He also appealed to his captor’s desire to please the king and alleviated his fears by allowing for a measurable evaluation of the suggested alternative.
2. Find Common Ground
Daniel searched diligently for common ground with his captors. He was wise enough to allow for a plan that benefited both sides. Common ground is not necessarily compromise. Through Daniel’s wisdom, not only did he keep himself personally pure, but he also helped his captors, or otherwise enemies, to benefit from his plan as well. In finding common ground, Daniel helped to spare both his life and made his adversary look good in the eyes of the king. Throughout the rest of the book we find Daniel was not only a willing participant but a leader in many aspects of the Babylonian culture, though he never strayed from his faith or compromised in his personal worship (Daniel 5:11).
If people of faith want to gain influence within a culture that is increasingly hostile or at the least is no longer actively friendly to much of the Christian message, it may be time that we actually learn from Daniel’s example or even heed Jesus words and “Bless those who curse you. Pray for those who hurt you.” At the end of the day, every human has the basic need to feel safe, be loved unconditionally, be respected and to feel like their life has significance. We all want the same things out of life, we just may disagree on where they come from. We lose common ground when we forget this and appear angry, whiny and selfish and we lose our ability to influence, but it doesn’t have to be that way. If the church and people of faith were known more for what we are for than what we are against, we may find that we regain our voice in the public square. When our lives are filled with hope, joy and a genuine concern for others we attract the right attention as people ask us “…to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect…” (1 Peter 3:15). If we’re looking for common ground, below are a few things gay, straight, black, white and most civilized people can agree on. How can we join together to help with these:
- At least 20.9 million adults and children are bought and sold worldwide into commercial sexual servitude, forced labor and bonded labor.
- About 2 million children are exploited every year in the global commercial sex trade.
- Almost half the world — over 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day.
- 6.9 million children under five years of age died in 2011, nearly 800 every hour.
- 99 percent of all maternal deaths occur in developing countries.
- 1.6 billion people — a quarter of humanity — live without electricity.
- The poorest 40 percent of the world’s population accounts for 5 percent of global income. The richest 20 percentaccounts for three-quarters of world income.¹
Maybe we can start here. I think we can agree on that.
3. Tell a Better Story
It only makes sense that (along with God’s help), Daniel carried himself in such a way that his captor, though a cultural and religious polar opposite, deep down inside was for Daniel. While it’s obvious from the text that God worked in his captor’s heart, Daniel was wise enough not to get in the way.
Dale Carnegie said “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” If you have ever been in sales at all you also know that internal pressure produces action but external pressure produces resentment. Leon Festinger formulated the cognitive dissonance theory in 1957 at Stanford University. He stated that “when attitudes conflict with actions, attitudes or beliefs, we are uncomfortable and motivated to try to change.” This means that people will naturally act in a way that is consistent with their beliefs, attitudes and values. When these all connect, we live harmoniously, but when they don’t, we feel dissonance to some degree or another. We may feel awkward, uncomfortable, upset, or even confused (take Peter and his vision of the great sheet in Acts 10, for example). To reduce this tension, we will often go to extraordinary lengths to change our attitudes, beliefs or behavior, even if it means doing something we normally wouldn’t want to do.
Simon Sinek, in his groundbreaking book Start with Why, shares how corporations and movements have created lasting influence and change as a result of their “Why”. Motive Matters. People don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it. I can tell you one thing people definitely don’t buy is self(ish) preservationism. That’s a horrible “why”. If people sense motives of self preservation from those trying to influence them, they can sniff that out a mile away. If you are going to influence anyone, as the old saying goes, “people don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” Christians, of all people, should know that the only thing that can provide lasting hope and joy is a relationship and identity rooted in Christ Jesus. It’s time we started behaving like we actually have it. While I believe healthy marriages to be the foundational institution of society, I also know that marriage alone does not make one happy. In time, our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters will find that out as well, and I, for one, want to be there for them when they figure that out.
We are where we are today NOT because of a Constitutional anomaly or even judicial activism but simply because, over time, one perspective on an issue managed to tell a better story. While one side was making arguments based upon an unshared religious viewpoint and self preservationism, the other was telling the story of real people and appealing to the basic human needs of love, respect and justice. Jesus himself even said “…for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light” (Luke 16:8 KJV). I wish not to make light of the potential cultural fallout of the magnitude of the Obergefell decision, however, after nearly 2 millennia, I still think that Paul, in his context of the Roman empire, was up against a steeper cultural climb than we could ever possibly know in America today. Even in the midst of all of that he leaves us these words in his epistle to the Romans (Romans chapter 1 seems to be the point of greatest conflict in the same-sex marriage issue, oddly enough):
“Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good. 10 Love each other with genuine affection, and take delight in honoring each other. 11 Never be lazy, but work hard and serve the Lord enthusiastically. 12 Rejoice in our confident hope. Be patient in trouble, and keep on praying. 13 When God’s people are in need, be ready to help them. Always be eager to practice hospitality. 14 Bless those who persecute you. Don’t curse them; pray that God will bless them. 15 Be happy with those who are happy, and weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with each other. Don’t be too proud to enjoy the company of ordinary people. And don’t think you know it all! 17 Never pay back evil with more evil. Do things in such a way that everyone can see you are honorable. 18 Do all that you can to live in peace with everyone. 19 Dear friends, never take revenge. Leave that to the righteous anger of God. For the Scriptures say, “I will take revenge; I will pay them back,” says the LORD. 20 Instead, “If your enemies are hungry, feed them. If they are thirsty, give them something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals of shame on their heads.” 21 Don’t let evil conquer you, but conquer evil by doing good.” [Rom 12:9-21 NLT]
Let’s start there. Because after all, Love really does win.
As I work to refocus my blog (thank you for your patience), and hopefully provoke us all to think more deeply and even laugh at ourselves more regularly, I may push a few proverbial buttons. While I’ll admit to being a sucker for shock value from time to time, I’ll try to at least be an equal opportunity offender. My main goal, however, is to present topics and questions that cause us to think and grow especially in matters of faith and culture. Unfortunately, too many of us spend little time thinking on and shaping the things that matter most in life–mainly, the beliefs that are rooted within us and the context in which those beliefs are lived out.
Irene Butter said, “An enemy is someone whose story you haven’t heard or who’s face you’ve not seen.” I’m not so naive as to set out for some Kum-ba-ya utopia, but I am convinced that we miss out on a lot of growth largely because we haven’t heard the stories of those with whom we may disagree OR we misrepresent their stories based on our own biases. When we learn to listen we often earn the freedom to speak. You can win an argument or you can win someone’s heart, but rarely will you do both.
So with that said, I would like to create an environment that makes discussing these differences both safe and civil where we can share our stories and learn from one another. Whether you consider yourself a person of great faith, little faith or no faith at all, I want to hear from you. We all NEED to hear from you. We will create a richer culture and deepen our faith when we learn to both live and tell a better story.
What do you think are some of the least discussed ideas in faith and culture and why?
Mount Pisgah is excited to be hosting the Continuum (LCI 2014) Conference on April 28 – 30, 2014. LCI (Large Church Initiative) is an assembly of church leaders and guests from around the nation who lead some of the largest and most influential churches in Methodism in an effort to share ideas and best practices as well as encourage and inspire one another in their respective ministries and callings. It has been my honor to serve on the steering committee of this great conference and carry on the tradition of equipping the next generation of leaders for Christ’s kingdom.
This year will feature keynote addresses from some of the most influential and innovative speakers and writers today. Among these are Mark Batterson, Chip Ingram, Jorge Acevedo, Steve Wood (my pastor), Sharma Lewis and Tim Tennent! The music and corporate worship times are sure to be inspiring as we are led in worship by Natalie Grant, Jason Ingram and One Sonic Society, the Nelons and the 150 voice Mount Pisgah Worship Choir. We are really excited about the worship and songwriting round table luncheon that we will host with Jason Ingram, Natalie Grant, Jason Clark and more! This will be a great time for worship leaders to get inside the hearts and minds of some of the leading songwriters of our generation. The conference will be a great time for pastors, their staff and key lay leaders to get refueled and equipped for maximum kingdom impact.
Mount Pisgah is rolling out the red carpet and hundreds of volunteers are already in preparation to make your experience at Mount Pisgah, LCI 2014 and the Atlanta area one that you will not quickly forget. We can’t wait to see you soon!
For more information and to register go to www.LCI2014.com.
Not long ago, a Florida mega-church abandoned split services (traditional and contemporary) for a more unified, “blended” service. The church, led by their new pastor, Tullian Tchavidjian (grandson of Billy Graham), decided to bring their church under one umbrella, united around the gospel. Tchavidjian said, “Generational appeal in worship is an unintentional admission that the Gospel is powerless to join together what man has separated”(click here for the article). This move triggered quite a bit of buzz in the church community. This move seems to be counter-cultural to much of the prevailing thought in church-growth today. Time will tell how well this works for them, but I applaud their consistency and vision for why they have made such a move. My forthcoming attempt to choose better terminology is by no means a criticism of this church–I simply give this as a high-profile example of a trend that is happening in the local church. While many of our churches have chosen their battles in the “worship wars”, many are still looking for answers to this complex question.
As in most conflict, much of the problem arises out of a misunderstanding of the language and intentions of those with whom we disagree. So, it is highly important that we define our terms and give everyone the benefit of the doubt in that we all want the same thing–a gospel-centered community of faith. Once we can agree on terms and trust the motives of our brothers and sisters in Christ, then we can begin to find answers as we participate in the free exchange of ideas that are based on biblical principle–not personal attacks and ideology based on personality and preferences.
Let me start with the idea of “blended” worship. First of all, I think I understand what most church leaders are referring to when they use this term, however, unless this is defined, it can still create several issues. First, the term blended worship was first put into the mainstream church lingo by Robert Webber, author, seminary professor, and founder of the Institute for Worship Studies in Jacksonville, Florida. The problem with this term, as it is commonly understood in non-liturgical, free church worship (which would characterize most independent and Southern Baptist churches), is not the way in which Webber defined it. Webber’s definition involved the blending of the ancient, liturgical practices with more contemporary expressions. He was an advocate of using liturgical church structure and infusing contemporary expressions within that structure. It’s not the intention of this post to debate the merit of Webber’s writings at this time (though, it is a worthy discussion for future posts), nor to debate the use of liturgical elements in worship, however, it illustrates the point that this term is greatly misunderstood. What we find is that those of us who often use the term the most, define it vastly different than the one who coined the term and wrote over 40 books that dealt with the idea.
My experience has been that most pastors and church leaders that I talk with define “blended” as a mixture of hymns and choruses. This is fine, and many churches have blended these two expressions somewhat successfully. However, I also believe that many that are attempting to move to a more “blended” format, carry some unrealistic expectations of what this format will do for them.
First, many attempt “blended” worship to try to “make everyone happy”. If you carry this motive for “blended” worship, you will find yourself sorely disappointed. What you will most likely find is that you will really make no one “happy”, but that everyone will be sufficiently dissatisfied with the music choices. The preferences of virtually no one will be satisfied and you will once again have a “fight” on your hands. The extremes of the personal preferences in most of our churches usually lie with the very young and the very old, and these two groups tend to be the most vocal, also assuring that “blended” worship will still fall tragically short because it still fails to address the preferences of these two groups. If we go to a blended format to make everyone “happy”, we are still relying on music to be the unifying factor, which doesn’t find it’s root in the Scripture.
Second, “blended” worship doesn’t typically address the content issues that we find in our songs. “Hymns” and “Choruses” are both broad terms that are equally as misunderstood and poorly defined as “blended”. What is a hymn? Is it what Paul talked about in Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19, or is it anything that was written prior to 1950? What is a chorus? Is it the refrain of a hymn or gospel song like “Turn Your Eyes upon Jesus” or is it a contemporary song like “In Christ Alone”, which resembles more of a modern hymn than a “chorus”? If you think that a “chorus” like “Gone, gone, gone, gone, yes my sins are gone…” is going to strike a nerve with the youth culture of this generation, you are probably going to be disappointed. Or if you think a “hymn” like “Mansion over the Hilltop” (which never mentions any attribute or name of God) is going to bring a Christo-centric unselfishness to your church, you may be disappointed there as well. I have no problem with either of these songs in the right context, but they help to illustrate the misunderstanding that can often occur when we don’t define our terms.
Third, “blended” worship, as it is commonly defined, fails to address context. The context of a church and the culture it is trying to reach is incredibly unique from church to church and from culture to culture. There is no way that being overly simplistic in saying that we do “blended” worship can adequately define or describe the way that you do church. The corporate worship needs of a new church plant are vastly different than a church that has been in existence for several decades. Each presents unique challenges and opportunities for unity and gospel-centered community.
Lastly, “blended” worship does a poor job of addressing the aesthetics of the music that we present. Does this mean that we do hymns that are “updated” and choruses that are “sanitized”, or does it mean that we do 50% traditional hymns and 50% contemporary choruses? Should “blended” worship look pretty much the same from church to church? What of the music, then? Does blended mean a mixture of drums and organ or electric guitar and timpani? What if you don’t have an organ or an electric guitar–can you still do “blended” worship? What does this sound like? Can we find this sound anywhere else in culture? Is that a good thing or a bad thing? These are a few of the questions that we need to wrestle with as we look at the concept of “blended” worship.
In the following post I will discuss the idea of “balanced” worship and see if this concept can provide a greater understanding of both the biblical and cultural implications of effective, gospel-centered ministry. What challenges do you see in some of our terminology and how are you addressing this in your church?
Corporate worship is based first and foremost on our common relationship in Christ. At first glance, this sounds pretty elementary and foundational to Christian doctrine. However, if you’ve ever tried to unify a diverse and multi-generational body in worship lately, you might find that it is easier said than done. Does that negate the truth of our unity in Christ? Not at all. However, the unnecessary conflict (some conflict is both healthy and necessary) exposes the fact that we enter into corporate worship with motives and expectations that aren’t based on our unity in Christ. Also, how we deal with that conflict is a tell-tale sign of where we are in our own relationship with God as well as an indicator of our love for our fellow believer.
So, what are the principles that should guide corporate worship in the church? Are we left to the whims of culture or are we confined solely to the traditions of man as they’ve been handed down to us? Is there middle ground, or is that simply compromise? These are questions that I have asked over the years.
As a leader, I want my actions and decisions to be founded on practical principles that won’t change through the passing of time. Does that mean that I lock myself in a cultural time-bubble, stick my head in the sand and decide right now THIS is the way it should be? I think not. I don’t want to make blanket statements today that I have to retract 20 years from now simply because I succumb to pressure or because I realize that my past decisions were based more on comfort and convenience than on what is biblical, practical, and effective.
Below, I have lined out some key thoughts that help guide me in my decisions for corporate worship. I pray that as we seek the Lord and learn to love people, our churches will once again experience the joy and unity of our common relationship with Christ.
Principle #1: Though Christianity is supracultural in its origin and truth, it is cultural in its application—this includes the arts when used as medium to the gospel message. (Acts 2; Acts 17:26-30; 1 Cor 9:19-22)
Principle #2: Through Christ, the church has experienced the redemption of articles and practices that may have at one time been considered common or undesirable for believers (Acts 10:9-15; 1 Tim 4:1-5; 1 Cor. 10:29-31; Titus 1:15).
Principle #3: God is both transcendent and immanent in His relationship with His people and the nature of this relationship will be evident in a balanced view of this truth as it relates to corporate worship. The fear of God is our foundation for our friendship with Him (Acts 17:24-27; Psalm 25:14).
Principle #4: Recognition should be made that sola Scriptura requires consistent reevaluation of even the most revered human traditions (Matt 15:3-6; Mark 7:9-13; Col 2:8; 1 Peter 1:18-19).
Principle #5: Clear communication is vital to corporate worship, and communication must be contemporary, at least in the sense of being familiar to the hearers. Anything that varies greatly from common forms and styles will do more to detract from the message rather than contribute to its communication (1 Cor 14:7-9).
Principle #6: Sensitivity to the potential presence of unbelievers in corporate worship gatherings should influence, at least to some degree, the elements of public worship events (1 Cor 14:23-25).
Principle #7: The Great Commission requires us to engage with the culture of people outside the church (Matt 28:19-20; Acts 17; Romans 15:20; 1 Cor 9:19-23).
Principle #8: Maintaining unity among the diversity of the church’s membership requires that we defer to one another in love, being willing to submit one another’s preferences to that which is most edifying to the church body as a whole (John 13:35; 1 Thes 3:12; Gal 5:13; Eph 5:21).
Principle #9: Expressions of art have no inherent power other than what the creators and interpreters of the art willingly give to it (Isaiah 2:8; 2 Tim 1:7; 1 Cor 8:1-13). This has two main implications concerning corporate worship music: (1 Cor 6:12).
- There is no music that is unlawful for Christian expression in and of itself. However, not all music may be appropriate for all cultural contexts. (1 Cor 10:23)
- There is no particular music and/or artistic expression that is necessary for corporate worship. However, certain expressions/styles will be more appropriate for particular cultural contexts. (Psalm 34:18; John 4:20-24)
Principle #10: God accepts and desires the worship of people from every race, nation, and tribe. (Psalm 66:4; Rev. 14:6-7; Rev. 5:9-10; John 4). These distinctions are largely cultural and the Scripture does not prohibit the free expression of worship based on cultural grounds only, unless the heart of the one who offers is not authentic (spirit and truth), or the expression is expressly forbidden in Scripture. (Mark 7:7; Gen. 4:4-7).
Let me know your thoughts.