Pensees: The Electric Guitar Dude gets a Pass, I think.

One can’t stand in the middle and have it both ways, without being superficial and confusing. You have to go to the roots and recognize that the world is the world whether it wears a tie and suit or neither, whether it bobs its head or doesn’t, whether it presents its product as real men or dudes. It has no qualms whatsoever about presenting itself at the extreme end of both spectrums or anywhere in between in order to suit its immediate objective. (Quoi de neuf ? what’s new? ) The modern church sadly has come to think it can have the same modus operandi and still suit the eternal purpose of its revered head. It can’t. Even Biblical preaching will, in time, be neutralized. Assimilated worldliness has always overpowered powerful preaching, as the Old Testament prophets confirm.

Great article Bob! lol and point well made.

that, my friend*, was a terrible choice for an opening metaphor. i don’t think i can even read the rest of the entry right now!

(* that’s speaking as a friend. it’s a given that, as my pastor, you’re not obligated to agree with or even to listen to my opinion. =})

Okay, Joy, I didn’t even SEE that until you pointed it out. Er, thanks.

Great entry! Keep posting!

I too am “blessed even as I am irritated when it comes to issues like these”. But let’s be careful in thinking about this. There are some funny thoughts here, but I have to check myself when I start to assess what I think are the “appropriate” ways to allow (or restrain) one’s outward indications of an inward attitude that may (or may not) be reflective of a true attitude of worship. On one hand, musicians should not be “performing” or “distracting” as they lead musical worship… On the other hand, who can tell the inner heart attitude? I’m by nature quick to try to make that conclusion, but I have to consider whether it’s fair to expect musicians (they are musicians, after all) to be outwardly restrained (or entirely unmoved and wooden) as they use their gifts. But if this exercise of musical “liberty” is making someone stumble in their worship… Then, if I am the musician, I need to restrain that for their sake.

As for acceptable music styles, I’m agnostic within limits of what istheologically correct, reverent, God-centered, non-distracting,
appropriate for congregational singing in a worship setting, etc..
But I once visited a church where a member informed me that he chose to attend there because he couldn’t find another church that had music that “didn’t appeal to the flesh”. What does that really mean? Did he mean that the other churches had music that led him to sin? Or, I wondered, was he saying that music is bad if it sounds good and you find your toe tapping? I smilingly wondered: “So what you’re saying is that to be acceptable music, it needs to NOT appeal to your senses? Does it need to be doctrinally right but lousy sounding to be OK?”

Without going into my opinion on the music itself or the performers, please allow me to share a concern about the nature of the post.

Sometimes we forget that there are real people on the other end of our electronic communication. We’ll often say things by e-mail or blog that we would never say face to face.

In this case, I have to wonder if a public blog post was the right way to handle your concerns. I certainly hope you wouldn’t go to these men and call them “girly boys” face to face.

If we have a problem with the behavior of a brother it’s right to gently confront them personally. Or in this case, it may have been appropriate to approach those who oversee the music and make decisions on how it is presented.

Would not the right approach include the attitude of 2 Timothy 2:24-26? And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

I often amused that people who would chastise me for speaking publically about someone without going to them do it on public blog! The contradiction is funny.

First of all, my remark about girly praisers is a general statement about a particular “worship genre.”

Secondly, the drummer was performing before three thousand people (minimally speaking).

Thirdly, you don’t know me very well if you wonder if I would be hesitate to tell them to their face that they were girly.

Fourthly, as you legitimately believe it right to rebuke me publically, I believe it is right to lightly make point about the showmanship of that particular kind of worship.

Fifthly, I hope they read it.

Sixthly, I have never impugned the motives of the drummer or any of the others. I am sure they are noble.

Seventhly, if it can be shown to me that the head flopping is due to some kind of epileptic or muscular disease, I would be very, very sorry and very public in my repentance.

Until then, I think that worship leaders need to be manly and discreet, doing everything to avoid distracting worshipers.

One can’t stand in the middle and have it both ways, without being superficial and confusing. You have to go to the roots and recognize that the world is the world whether it wears a tie and suit or neither, whether it bobs its head or doesn’t, whether it presents its product as real men or dudes. It has no qualms whatsoever about presenting itself at the extreme end of both spectrums or anywhere in between in order to suit its immediate objective. (Quoi de neuf ? what’s new? ) The modern church sadly has come to think it can have the same modus operandi and still suit the eternal purpose of its revered head. It can’t. Even Biblical preaching will, in time, be neutralized. Assimilated worldliness has always overpowered powerful preaching, as the Old Testament prophets confirm.

Well said. The question, however, is how worldliness is perceived with any sense of authority. Because it puts me out of my comfort zone, is it worldly?

Bob,

I wrote a comment to post here, but it was too long, so I posted it to my blog instead. In it I urge you to rethink this post. I invite you to consider it and respond.

Blessings…
Andy Snider
theologyislife.blogspot.com

Bob,

Rather than responding to the style issues your post raises, how about a substantive challenge: The title of the post was, “the electic guitar dude gets a pass.” The gist was that the electric guitar guy was not wearing a tie, while everyone ele in “platform ministry” had to wear “the obligitory tie.” First, there was no electric guitar there. It was a bass. Second, others were not wearing ties. Some other singers were not wearing ties. One of the preachers was not wearing a tie. Certianly preaching counts as platform ministry. It seems that your beef is with bass, not with ties. Either way, it seems silly.

Thanks,

Jay

So, in other words, you simply didn’t like it and think you’re more masculine than the worship leader because you’re so, uh, “manly”. No biblical argument, no theological principles. Just straight up personal preference and parading of testosterone. You’re hilarious.

And well, you ARE entitled to your opinion. Thanks for your opinion. Here’s a penny for your thoughts; you can keep the change.

The people you’re making fun of and insulting have names, and the anonymity of your attacks veils that.

John Martin is the worship leader. He’s a great guy who loves the Lord and loves his wife (she’s quite girly) and sings tenor, hence he has a high voice.

The drummer is David Zimmer. He’s a very quiet fella who’s grandpa is currently dying of cancer of the spine and sometimes he loses himself in worship. I used to get annoyed by him and then I got to know him a bit and I realized the amount of suffering his family is enduring, and he sometimes comes before the Lord and loses himself. I understand his suffering and I have some grace with him. He’s young and suffering as he’s watching his favorite person in the world rot from the inside out. I don’t lose sleep over him now.

Here’s a note for the future, and something I learned a while ago:

Everytime you shoot your mouth off before you get your facts straight, you only reveal how arrogant and ignorant you are. I’ve done this plenty and have had to apologize my fair share to people that I walked over.

I don’t like sitting by and seeing the Lord’s servants get slammed by blog bullies who are nothing but talk. You made fun of brothers in the Lord who are serving and suffering alongside you, and next time you come to shepherds conference, you owe them both an apology. Anything less makes you a pansy.

Sir, if you are unaware of the difference between an electric guitar and a bass, you SHOULD NOT be critiquing the music. It might be better to just say “I did not like the music because I have different preferences” than to somehow announce how you thought the worship leader was effeminate/homosexual and the drummer had epilepsy. The root issue was your distaste for the style, to which your are fully entitled. Insults and clever/vulgar imagery do not make your prefered styles the “correct” style. Insults and clever/vulgar imagery reveal an insulting and clever/vulgar heart (Matthew 12:34).

Hey, Armchair - your comment is just as out of line as some of the stuff in Bob’s post. I’m grieved that you chose not to rise above personal attacks on a brother in Christ. I was critical of Bob’s post, but based on your comments, I hope he doesn’t associate me with you.

Well, I guess I’m my own illustration. Every time I shoot MY mouth off before I factor my words through the “does this edify” filter, I get called to account too.

I apologize for insinuating anything regarding your masculinity or that you’re a bully. That was foolish and disrespectful. Heck, feel free to delete my comment. I’m sorry for bring more heat than light to this string of comments.

I just want to go on record to say that I was there at the Shepherd’s Conferance and the bassist WAS wearing a tie. Does he still get a pass? I’d like to know what Bob’s “most favoritest” type of music to worship to is.

This is not my response to Andy

You exegete poorly. I never said that electric guitar dude (the bassist) wasn’t wearing a tie. Read again. I said, “speaking of ties….suits.” The operative word was “suits.” Not that it matters much because that wasn’t my point, but it just shows how emotional you guys are getting over my tongue-in-cheek satire.

So far the substance of your arguments have been:

1/ you are making a big deal about ties. Silly.
2/ you called a bass guitar an electric guitar. Dumb.
3/ you called my friends’ style girly. Mean.

Boo-hoo. One must be very studious to ignore so carefully the actual intent of my piece. But now I feel obliged to answer your “challenges.”

1. Ties. I said several times that I didn’t care about ties. My point is that churches across the board begin to make exceptions about who they allow on the platform in the area of music performers. Period. To say that there is no dress code for the platform is almost humorous, but I have to take your word for it.

Granted, CJ Mahaney did not wear a tie. But he made it clear that he felt that he would probably be expected to wear a tie. Get the tape. So apparantly he had the same perception I did. I never did see a person on stage that was not in a suit unless it was the bassist.

Again, I am not on a campaign for dress standards on stage. I often don’t wear a tie on our platform. My point was that churches often capitulate their expectations when it comes to their musicians. Watch the tape. As far as I can recall, CJ was the only exception to not wearing a suit and that is obviously because he never planned on speaking in the first place.

2. Electric guitar/bass guitar. Of course, I know the difference. Sheesh. My title AGAIN was to make a general observation about what I see in many churches toward the particular genre of worship. Except for the one occasion where I referenced the “electric guitar dude” not in a suit, all the other references were about the guitarist/bassist/drummer/whatever of that kind of worship genre getting a pass. Sure I could have been a little more precise, but I had no idea my blog would be getting so many hits from Southern California this week. Nonetheless, you mount a powerful argument if you hammer home the point that I called the bass guitar an electric guitar. (The previous statement was sarcasm for those of you who can not seem to pick up on subtilties.)

3. I know the drummer is a real person. And I am truly sorry his grandpa is dying. But that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the subject. I have sad and difficult things going on in my life too. There were also hundreds of other real persons in that auditorium who were distracted from worshiping. What about them? They have sad stories too.

GCC intends to make their entire conference instructional. That’s obvious. Getty’s music was promoted after one of the worship services and sold in the bookstore. Since everything is supposed to be so instructional, I think it is a bit infantile to boo-hoo when the “teachers” get criticized.

I repeat that I never judged the motive of the musicians. I merely stated that it was distractive and even irritating.

Here’s something funny: one of the drummer’s defenders in the above comments section admitted that he found the drummer “annoying” too! That is, of course, until he found out about the drummer’s sad stories. Please don’t judge me, then, for being annoyed. It would have been kind of you to print out a biographical sketch of all the musicians then I wouldn’t have been annoyed either.

My criticism, frankly, is reserved for the leadership of the church, not the musicians. I actually like John Martin’s voice when he sings, though I take exception to the soto voce cooing style of leadership that most evangelical Americans think is the only tone legitimate for “worship.”

I have been called many things and don’t waa-waa. In fact, in this comment section alone I have been referred to as a pansy with a clever/vulgar heart with Scripture verses to imply that I am being pugnacious and the like.

Puh-leeze.

If you don’t like your boys being criticized then don’t put them on center-stage, teach conservative evangelicals all over America how to worship, and promote your style to three thousand leaders in American Christianity. It may shock the living daylights out of you, but some of us manage to worship God in thanksgiving because of GCC without falling down on the earth and going ga-ga over every one of its suggestions.

I’m one of them.

You said, “I am deliberately making a mountain out of a molehill.” Okay. Sometimes it makes us feel better if we can just talk about our chafing underwear, even though it really doesn’t change much. But throwing potshots like “girly boys,” “whimpy,” “swaddled babies,” with “mommy voices” toward those who gave their time to serve you suggests a lack of mature manhood on your part.

It seems to me that the core argument of Bob’s post is that there is no place for distractions in the song service.

I too was at the conference and witnessed the various styles of music that were performed. Frankly, I was not all that distracted by much of anything with the song services (with one exception—see below). I for one, love the variety of music at the conference and was grateful for the sacrifice of time the various people exerted to minister to me.

However, the “uproar” against Bob’s post is perplexing. Having read the article a couple of times it seems that some are overreacting, and perhaps carrying a grudge for people they know.

I am now officially planning to ride the fence…

I am personally aware of several people who were very distracted by some of the individuals during the service. Honestly, I think if they are that distracted they need to look down at their shoes and give the benefit of the doubt. Often times they are distracted simply because they are uncomfortable with a certain style.

While some were unsettled by the more contemporary music, I was equally uncomfortable with the style of the Master’s Chorale’s performance. I could make the argument that while some didn’t like the breathy tone of the newer songs, at least I could understand what they were singing.

On the flip side, there is a very legitimate point that Bob seems to be making, which is those who take the platform need to be very careful to get out of the way! Don’t do anything that would take attention away from the One who deserves it.

I can’t tell you how many times I have cringed when a song leader has been leading a song only to stop right in the middle to explain how he wanted just the women to sing the next verse, then he stops again to have the men sing the next one, then he stops again to encourage us to sing parts, and then the next verse as a round and on and on. It’s like batting around a beach ball in the middle of the worship. In other words, this distraction happens all to often regardless of the style.

I appreciate those of you who care enough about your friends to run to their defense, but is it possible you are missing the point?

I know David personally and have even seen him perform other than at the Shepherds’ Conference. While playing for his high school jazz band, David was quite expressive. In fact, he was not much different than when he performed at the conference. The point I am making is that DZ is a very expressive performer. Providing his motivation is correct, I think that even Jonathan Edwards would have appreciated him. DZ was definitely not drumming “to be seen by men.” FWIW, that is the way he plays.

NOT to enter into the full discussion— I just want to say that you shouldn’t use the P word in refering to yourself, Pastor. I mean “pugnacious.” Brings back painful and, now years later, almost funny memories.

Pastor Bob, I think the problem here is that your a product of Christian institutional training that never provided you with sensitivity training. The real breakdown here could be the fact that you were deprived of Sensitivity 101! Had you just gone to a university on the west coast, this breakdown in the system would have never occurred.

Never mind that you stated this was making a mountain out of a molehill. You just didn’t realize how far tripping over your own chaff providing pantyhose would take you.

Next time your in town here, I’ll make sure I post on your blog how girly you look in your outfit. I know you can handle it being the big boy that you are!

Blessings friend!!! :)

Bob,

Let me encourage you to hold to your intention and promise of responding to Andy. I pray you will consider it carfeully.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqyY2VVRnC0

Copy and Paste the link above to watch the famous, flailing, and rambunctious trio at the Shepherd’s Conference. Notice the way that they sway…almost, suggestively with the legato groove. What is worship coming to these days?