More Songs from New Attitude
Scott Aniol June 7th, 2008
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. You can also subscribe by e-mail.
You can also sign up for our free newsletters here.
Thanks for visiting!
Bob Kauflin posts more songs from Sovereign Grace’s New Attitude conference for young adults.
- Spontaneous, Prophetic Songs
Bob Kauflin posts some of the music from the Sovereign... - Prophetic Songs
Bob Kauflin explains his beliefs concerning spontaneous, prophetic impressions from... - Christmas Programs
Bob Kauflin addresses Christmas productions in church.... - Losing a Little One
Here are two different philosophies of using music to be... - Gospelless Gospel Songs
T. J. Klapperich with some excellent commentary.... - News & Reviews
- Comments(13)
Related items:
Hi Scott…
I’m wondering what your reason is for posting this link. Giving a listen to the songs offered, they don’t seem to be of the sort you endorse, so I am a little confused as to the thought behind the link.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Thanks for asking, Don. As I posted this, I wondered if people might be wondering that.
As you probably know, many conservatives are lauding Sovereign Grace for their music because their lyrics are so theologically rich, and I’d have to agree with them on that point for the most part.
I just want to give people an opportunity to hear first-hand what they consider to be God-honoring music. And I don’t want to necessarily comment, because I want people to draw their own conclusions from what they hear.
In essence, I’m asking, “Would you encourage the young adults in your church to attend this conference, even if you do appreciate their theological positions?”
Thanks Scott, that’s what I thought but wanted to make sure.
I have been to some of their other sites where their groups have albums for sale… whew!!!
Not the kind of crowd I want to be in partnership with.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Scott,
I am well acquainted with Kauflin and Sovereign Grace Ministries from my days in Christian radio. I think conservatives gravitate to their music for a negative reason; it is a reason we should never use, but often do. The progression looks like this: enjoyment of the contemporary sound - disappointment with contemporary lyrical content - excitement when quality content is set to “modern” music. The enjoyment (no matter how carnal it may be) is the initial factor in the final choice. We settle for something “better than most” rather than searching for that which is “best”.
When I was managing a “conservative” contemporary station, I was sent one of the first ever Sovereign Grace recordings; they were then known as PDI (can’t remember what that stood for). The lyrical content was light years ahead of almost everything else being released at that time. We were genuinely excited; in fact I remember contacting their record label and thanking them for the thoughtful and theologically accurate content they were providing! It was, and is, one of the better contemporary projects in existence. Still, I was settling for the “better than most”, rather than the best.
At that moment in time, both my wife and I would have fought with you on your position. I am convinced now it was because of our enjoyment of the contemporary sound first - and our appreciation for the lyrics second. It was a fight with God, not a fight with someone taking the more conservative position.
All this to say; praise God we do not hold the same view today! We are always asking ourselves the same question about how we should proceed in regard to music, or anything else we consume, endorse, or participate in: “what is best?” Not “what do we like?”, “what can we get away with?”, or “what is better than most?” This question typically forces us to examine scripture and query our Savior first.
By the way, I was writing for an industry publication at the time and was already considered a “radical conservative” for often criticizing the industry. Guess I am getting more and more radical with age!
Thought this story might add to the discussion. Didn’t realize I was getting so long-winded.
Chris
[...] was prompted to republish this message because of a series of comments I read relating to an article linked on the Religious Affections Ministries site. I didn’t even listen to the songs mentioned, I just saw [...]
Chris, that’s a very helpful way of putting the progression. I think you’re dead on.
I describe it this way: many good Christians, while they repudiate the entertainment philosophy of worship, nevertheless fail to recognize that they have been profoundly influenced by that philosophy in how they view music, culture, aesthetics, etc.
Scott,
Is worship a separating issue?
Kent
Hi, Kent.
I don’t understand separation to be an on/off kind of thing, but dependent upon the degree of difference and the particular circumstance at hand.
So, the issue of music (which is what we’re really talking about, right?) is certainly not as important as the gospel itself. It is a secondary issue.
But, how we worship certainly reflects the gospel. Or, I should say, how we worship reveals our deepest understanding of the gospel, how we relate to God, the role of the Holy Spirit, etc.
So, I would say in the case of New Attitude, for instance, because their music is tied to a certain understanding of worship, the Holy Spirit, etc. that I think is biblically, I would not personally endorse it or take a group to the conference even though I might appreciate the speakers, endorse their books, or even distribute audio sessions from the conference.
Part of the reason for this is a point I’ve made on and off here: error in the realm of the affections is often more dangerous than error in the realm of the mind. Doctrinal errors can often be easily refuted or explained to weaker believers, but Musical errors are difficult. Furthermore, I can listen to a talk and sift through minor doctrinal disagreements with little negative influence to myself, but to have my affections influenced negatively by certain forms of music is exponentially more difficult to prevent.
So in one sense I would separate, and in another I would not. Does that make sense?
Hi to you too Scott.
I haven’t found anything that I disagreed with you about the music itself. I think that churches should be urged unto psalm singing, since we have strong Scriptural and historic basis for that, but what you do say about music, I agree with. You seem to want to be positive about it and when you’re negative, you seem to be strategically attempting to change people’s minds rather than “cut them off.” I can admire that part of it. You seem also to be working off of a certain kind of incrementalism where you are taking baby steps toward your goal. It also seems (a lot of seems here because I’m assuming you can tell me I’m wrong) that you think the way to get this done is by some kind of engagement with those who disagree with you. You use quite a bit of induction, a kind of Socratic methodology, I believe, thinking that you can lead people to the right kind of worship.
I question your method for accomplishing this, and I say question, because it isn’t the method of Jesus. He didn’t engage. He told people the truth in no uncertain terms. He depended on the truth to make the difference, not some strategy.
I asked you the simple question. Jesus ties the gospel with worship in John 4:23, 24 and Paul does it in Philippians 3:1-4. If you disconnect them, then you lose the point of the gospel, which is a major feature of the gospel. On top of this, worship itself, separate from the gospel, is a separating issue—2 Cor. 6:14-7:1. And third, historically those with whom you are closest in your fellowship have separated based on the music issue (music/worship are the same; you say this in your Why Music presentation). Think Pensacola as an example of number three.
Your ambiguity about CJ Mahaney’s group and thus the T4G group regarding their worship, I believe, confuses men on the issue. I can see how that this is what concerned Don. Even with your explanation to Don, it seems to me, with the role that you are taking in pointing out what’s right in church worship, it isn’t clear to men how bad their false worship is. I agree with your commenter Chris as to the danger as well. It offends God. And then, like he said, the first attraction is the flesh, which breaks down the ability to discern, damages the conscience, and then the content is used to justify it, which is abominable.
The engagement strategy seems to be a new approach all the way around for separatists. You’ll be applauded all the way around, but I don’t believe it will work. I don’t believe it is the best approach. Most of all, I don’t think it is Scriptural.
I’m on your side on this so please take this as me encouraging you.
Thanks, Kent.
Like I said, I do believe that worship is tied to the gospel. But I also realize that there are so many issues tied to this issue that need articulation, so I’m willing to be patient and take “baby steps.” People want quick, pat answers to these things, and I just don’t think that’s wise. I’m fully convinced of the answers, but I realize that they are difficult.
You’re right; many in our circles have traditionally made very quick statements on these things, and maybe in their day that worked. But my generation wants to think through every point, and I’m willing to work with them on that.
All who know me have no question where I stand on Mahaney/Kauflin/Sovereign Grace style of music: textually it is great, musically I believe it is an offense to God. I don’t think the way that I am attempting to influence contradicts my convictions about that.
And I also recognize the attraction of their music — textually it is far superior to much of anything “we” have produced in the last 50 years. So I appreciate that focus while abhorring their music.
But my generation wants to think through every point, and I’m willing to work with them on that.
Scott
Just thinking through this statement… there is nothing wrong with patiently instructing the teachable. I’m all for it.
But when “this generation” insists on “thinking through every point”, would it be possible to characterize that as pride? Who can know all thing? At some points, we do have to submit our wills to God’s authority and shun worldliness. It seems to me that quite often the alleged desire to “think things through” is simply a smokescreen for “we’re going to do what we want to do”. It sounds pious, but it isn’t.
But please note, I am not against thorough teaching and reasoning out the details especially in this important area. I am pointing out that thorough teaching will only work with the teachable.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Don,
I’m sure there is pride and unwillingness to submit to God’s authority present on both sides of the debate. But I also acknowledge that we don’t have direct revelation concerning what forms of music are acceptable to God. That doesn’t mean He doesn’t care; my contention is that he does care, and we need to take the time to discern what pleases Him by applying the Bible to our contemporary culture.
So we have to think through every point!
Point taken…
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3