Where buildings are the church.
No wonder she’s confused about who’s part of the church, she thinks Jesus died to save buildings.
My church leases out its space to anyone who wants to use it as a service to the community, as long as they don’t damage the property, and pay the heating/cooling cost you can rent our building for most any type of event. Weddings, bridal showers, birthday parties, and concerts.
In this particular case, when I was approached about the use of our building two months ago, I asked the kid organizing it all to ask the bands to avoid the FCC related words that Ingrid is so concerned about. I realize she loves to adhere to the world’s version of morality, so that should ease her troubled mind.
Oh, and its nice to see that Christianity’s own low rent version of Richard Nixon is still doing her best to dig up dirt on your’s truly. Of course if she had bothered to email me, then she’d have known what was going on. Instead she continues to be an accuser of the saints. At this point her work is far more satanic than this particular band’s.
115 Comments(+Add)
I am really getting the stalker vibe. Who has time to look up everything related to our church or you?
I don’t get it???
Help me out “No wonder she’s confused about who’s part of the church, she thinks Jesus died to save buildings.”
Where do you get that from the link???
we do the same at Mosaic.
Ingrid is going crazy with this stuff. I am sure she is being a good steward of her time by looking through a million google results of “Owosso Church of Christ” to find this little scrap of a story. I guess when the tabliods are slim, you have to do that.
What she does now has LITTLE to do with Christ, the Church or “discernment”. I used to think of her as the old church lady who complains about the hymn selections and the color of the carpet. However, she has far surpassed that excectation. Ingrid, get a life… or better yet, get a calling.
Kyle,
she aaumes that because they are renting the building that this is a church event. She equates four walls with the church. Did they bother to actually do some “Christian Research” to see if this was a church sponsored event?
Then whose duty is it to judge the church?? We are not to judge the world that is God’s job but we, mature christians, should call out and judge what is wrong in the church.
Also why are you picking on her about this one? Did you see and hear what they call “christian music”? It has neither the words nor the attitude of a christian. If you love the world you hate the Father.
Looks like Ken doubled the fun
Tim,
I think Ingrid’s next piece is going to be about the mean name you called that girl when you were in second grade.
THIS IS NOT A CHURCH EVENT!!!! Look at the church website. It is not their event. Some bands rented the building. Period. Ingrid assumes WAY to much. Maybe her Holy SPirit meter is off here.
Here’s a question, one that Ingrid is fond of pronouncing on others. Do her actions come close to resembling that of a true Christian? Does she exhibit the markings of the true bride of Christ?
Mandy,
It is pretty scary huh? Maybe they pay money to a private investigator!
The church is responsible for what happens in its building. If a church was renting their building to an abortion clinic then the church is killing babies. If I allow a drug dealer to borrow or rent my car and he is busted by law it is the owner of the car who would be charged outside of confessions or an other evidence.
So this church let’s bands play their that are unchristian in thier approach to music that means the church lets them and the people attainding will think that the church is infact endorsing the music. If it happens in your walls and you let it happen then you are responsbile for it.
Am I disconnected on this one. If I rent my house to a bar that means I approve of bars even though I may never drink.
Question: Are all people able to see the difference between a church-sponsored event and merely a building being rented out?
Most non-Christians see the church building as part of the definition of church. So, whether that is true or not, do we have a responsibility to take that into account as part of our witness to the world? i.e. be careful how we use our buildings?
Is our greater purpose to reach people with the gospel, or to revel in our freedom which was given us? I think there’s a fine line here, in which both sides are firmly on opposites sides but missing something important.
Everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial. These are good words to consider. I sometimes find the argument over whether something is permissable to be the one we carry on here, in response to an ODM site claiming it isn’t. The ignored second half is often sloughed off vaguely: is it beneficial? is it constructive?
Just sayin’.
One last question: what business is this of Ken’s or Ingrid’s? Seriously, they used to defend themselves by saying the people they attacked were big names. Tim is far from a big name preacher. His church is letting people in their community use their building. They’re reaching out to a group of people who may need Jesus. Now Ken, and Ingrid are getting all exorcised over what? How are they redeeming anything. This is beyond modern day religious leaders. This is…..rrrrr…I can’t even come up with words for it.
I’m confused. Isn’t at least one of these bands a Christian band? If that’s the case, what’s the problem?
Julie,
I see what you’re saying, although my experience is that most people wouldn’t think that hosting a rock show at a church would be a negative thing. There may be a line where it’s kind of viewed as universally wrong, such as Marilyn Manson, but I think most non-Christians wouldn’t really question most bands. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think actually being involved in a community would be seen more positively than tightly regulating who and who can’t use a building.
Kyle,
Did you seriously just compare allowing a-religious bands to use a building that a church meets in to performing abortions?
Wow.
I agree Tim,
What Kyle did was an apples and oranges comparison.
The building is NOT holy. Sorry.
Joe
I would never suggest not being actively involved in the community, but we have to take into consideration the culture of that community. Perhaps in Ingrid’s community, this would be seen as anathema to what a church should be doing. It would in mine, I know. If the churches around here had these bands, people would be mortified as well as repulsed. So, for me to view what is happening in Tim’s church building is much like trying to process the Red Hot Bash at Driscoll’s: it doesn’t compute. It’s not so much a building issue, but a set-apart issue.
Sometimes, when we throw out the “I’m trying to reach the community where it is at, and be actively involved in the community” response to anyone questioning what we’re doing, we miss something. It’s our own way of shutting someone up, just like ODMs might use any of their typical arsenal of ways to point out wrongness.
It is one thing to reach the community for reaching’s sake, but another to reach the community for the gospel’s sake. I know how to reach the community — heck, I just have to offer free art classes for kids and adults and bam! the community is there — but do my methods of reaching the community occur in ways that, if I later come with the gospel message, my earlier efforts don’t ring true and actually hinder it? Because that’s a problem.
People know when you’re hitting them with the lowest common denominator, the easiest “cheese” to the mousetrap. Entertainment gospel tends to do that, and I’m seeing more and more (around here, at least) that entertainment-based youth ministry “reaches” the kids but it reaches them on a superficial level that they easily discard. They’re not dumb. They want to be entertained. So they go where that happens. At this point, they don’t care if it’s a church or an auditorium because they see no difference. They’re savvy and know the game and also know that when the Jesus-y stuff comes ’round, they can blow it off like any other advertisement that was sold them wrapped in fun.
Reaching the community where they need it — food, social justice, health, education, etc. — instead of constant entertainment has always worked best. Or, at least, in my community’s culture. Entertainment brings the bigger crowd, but it has the least sticking effect.
So, essentially, it might be permissible, certainly, but is helping or hurting in the long-run? What’s the image we are attaching to our church building? What does that, conversely, attach to our church body, and our message?
Seriously, they used to defend themselves by saying the people they attacked were big names. Tim is far from a big name preacher. His church is letting people in their community use their building.
Come on… be fair. I agree with you all most of the time.
But do you really not get why they are going after Tim? Turnabout is fair play. This site was set up to critique Slice and C?N. I have no problem with that. But in turn, you make yourselves public figures. You also make yourselves a target.
I disagree with Ingrid’s perspective on the concert. But I don’t really have a problem with her looking at Tim or Tim’s church. If you can attack her and Slice or Ken, C?N, Apprising, and his church, then they can do the same to you.
Julie,
I tend to agree with you. I think that entertainment type events usually suck as means of a Gospel presentation. I think though, that there are ways that the church can be involved in the community without compromising it’s values.
For example, every other Friday night, our campus hosts and open mic/coffeehouse. We generally allow anyone to perform. The only rules we have are no swearing and no sexually explicit language. There’s only been a couple time over the last three years where we’ve ever had to say anything to anyone about it.
The thing that has been awesome is that we have had a lot of people come back who would never enter a church building otherwise. Some of them have come to some other events. They come because they get to perform, and they can bring their friends. The kids in our group form relationships with them, and they end up doing other things with them. The ladies in our sponsoring church bake cookies for us, and we provide free coffee and hot chocolate. Overall, I say it’s the best thing we’ve done as a church.
You essentially have two choices. You can wall of your church and buy a bunch of members-only jackets, or you can be a part of your community. My church has chosen the second. Then again we want to be in people’s lives, as opposed to being so irrelevant that we’re exiled to the internet where we spend all day cyber-stalking anyone who disagrees with us.
>
Yeah, she must not get out much
My thing is, I’ve seen churches open up their buildings to concerts for around town and that’s all fine and neutral The way I’ve seen it made into something constructive is when the bands may just be people from around town who asked to use the space, it’s when the church goes the extra mile and will staff the event, ticket takers, bouncers and even just people put in the audience to meet people, to make people from church present in the local scene, that things go well.
Then the congregants of the church become known for keeping people safe, for being helpful , being first aid, being trustworthy and such, and that often gives a platform to invite people back to actual church sponsered events and to-do’s. It’s a ministry of presence where you don’t even have to leave the building. If bands find it a safe place to play, it can go a long way. Then when someone is invited to the church they can say “I know where that is, and their’s this great guy Dave who runs security at shows that attends there!”
Now it then asks the question of if the church limits what is said in the shows themselves, and other concerns along there, but for there I’m sure church by church they know their own limitations and boundries.
It deleted my quote of “I can truly say I have never seen anything as blatantly satanic in my life.” that I followed up with Yeah, she must not get out much,
If the photos of kids rocking out on the Yellow sign site are the most satanic things she’s ever seen, she’s never seen anything satanic before.
I don’t mind at all dave. It just reveals the weakness of their own positions and theology. After all I could go around talking about Ingrid is daddy’s little princess and never accomplished anything on her own, and is just a product of nepotism, or that Ken has utterly decimated his church and is left with an extremely small Sunday school class. But instead I actually engage their ideas.
Their idea of engaging Christians is to dig up 18 month old sin that has been dealt with by the individuals involved and to post untrue articles detailing events happening within a building where Christians meet.
It’d be comical if I didn’t care about their holiness or integrity at all.
In this case I don’t care for either post.
Maybe I’m just too old, but looking at the lyrics from Yellow Sign songs – no way would they perform in our building… rental agreement or not. I’m not sure you can say something that morbid is a-religious… but that’s another discussion.
Julie is right, “we” all know the distinction between the true church and the building, but does the greater community? Sometimes “guilt by association” has a point.
As for the comment – “…she thinks Jesus died to save buildings.” – that comment is over the top and only serves to be provocative. If we are ever guilty of being like them, it’s when we make comments like that. Further, Ingrid even said “A church of Christ rents their building…” so obviously she knows the difference between the Church and the building.
As for Ingrid’s original post. It’s rather worthless. Saying a church rents its building to Satan is also overly provocative and inflammatory – to the point of being useless. At some point the whole thing becomes an exercise in hysteria for her. And if the Yellow Sign website is the most blatantly Satanic thing she’s ever seen – she needs to surf more.
Bottom line: Ingrids accusations are, as usual, over the top and filled with anger, hate, and condescending judgmentalism… Tim’s response (I’m sorry to say) is not a whole lot better. Maybe it would be best if both sides didn’t create posts in defense of themselves…
Sorry Tim, on this one we are gonna have to agree to disagree…
Neil
Julie,
this is not a loaded question, but do you think the community would be repulsed by the type of music played (and the artwork that goes with metal), or the fact that it isn’t “Christian”?
Would we be disagreeing if, say… a secular jazz band wanted to rent the place?
“What she does now has LITTLE to do with Christ, the Church or “discernmentâ€.
Right back atcha’
“Does she exhibit the markings of the true bride of Christ?”
Do you? BTW, What are the markings?
There are those who delve into the “controversial” simply to attract attention. There is wisdom in who you rent the building out to. Are you just out to make a buck?
Of course the building is not the church. Where did Ingrid ever say otherwise? More rhetoric.
I suggest you listen to Julie on this one.
Thanks for the Purpose Driven drive-by, Chris P.
Again, maybe it’s my age, but the jazz that Julie talked about, or the open-mic stuff Phil’s church does sounds a whole lot better.
Neil
Two issues as I see – the style of music and the posts.
What I meant to address were the posts.
Neil
“”but do you think the community would be repulsed by the type of music played (and the artwork that goes with metal), or the fact that it isn’t “Christianâ€? “”
To sort of second this, Even If the “community” (a part of such as no community has solidarity on these sorts of things) was repulsed by metal and edgier artwork, I’m sure they’d find plenty of churches that would be playing their music and hating on the art they hate anyhow.
I’d be glad for the community who does like this music, and does have art like this to find a churched who isn’t shocked by them, who isn’t repulsed by them, many of whom may enjoy the same style of music (maybey not the exact same bands/lyrics) and art. That that community finds this church a place willing to spend time with them, a place where they can come into church with their music and art unassailed by the ignorant or standoffish just because of optional and taste issues.
There are those who delve into the “controversial†simply to attract attention.
You mean sites like Slice, C?N, and Apprising?
Well, no….that’s almost a false dichotomy. There are other options rather than the extremes, i.e. walled-off or having metal bands. The second option that you present and say your church is doing is open to definition: what does being “part” of the community entail? That is what I’m trying to say in my comments. Does being part of the community necessarily mean bringing in entertainment that non-Christians might be confused as to how to interpret it being held in a church building? Or does being part of the community also allow for being different?
People are looking for the stand-out, the one with the backbone, the one that can say no, the one that is the hero, the one that doesn’t sell-out or compromise. They really are. They want something to follow, something true. Catering to everything people like as a way of being part of the community is a very slippery slope, because it doesn’t mean it will do anything beyond fill the communities immediate “want” instead of “need.” There are other ways to being part of the community. That’s kind of what I’m trying to get at in my earlier comments — not saying “pull back from the community.”
Since jazz is the music they play in hell, I would be totally against it.
Seriously, it isn’t the kind of music I’m getting at, or even musical events in particular. I like metal music. My attempt is one of wider scope: just because we can doesn’t mean we should. There is a larger picture to consider other than fellow Christians agreeing that our permissible freedoms won’t be a problem for ourselves.
Again, maybe it’s my age, but the jazz that Julie talked about, or the open-mic stuff Phil’s church does sounds a whole lot better.
Seriously? So we are now saying that certain genres of music are not allowed in a church building?
That must be one of the verses that was accidentally left out of my Bible, where talks about how only soft gentle music is allowed to be played/performed in a building where church services are held.
Julie, say it ain’t so. Jazz is one of the few pure American art forms.
Although, Frank Zappa did call jazz the music of unemployment…
As you can see, Dave, I was not addressing specific music types. I was talking about a general concept. Our comments crossed paths in publishing, I think.
Jazz.
Oh, man.
I have a select few songs that I like, and that’s it.
Didn’t Jesus cleanse a four-walled “building” because of the misuse of it? I understand that the temple was different than what our buildings are today, but still we need to focus and encourage whatsoever things are pure…
Dave,
I guess you’ll have to trust me that my mind is more open then it appears when it comes to “genres of music are not allowed in a church building.”
I don’t like metal, but I’m not saying it should not be played in the church. I was addressing the specific lyrics posted by Yellow Sign – they are morbid. They talk of death and dismemberment. Unless I am interpreting them wrong those specific lyrics should not be associated with the church or it’s building.
Does that distinction make sense?
It may be hair-splitting, but even if the church is not “sponsoring” the event, by holding it in their facilities they are “sanctioning” it.
Does that help or just make the discussion worse?
Neil
I must say, I do find Ingrid’s update hilarious.
No, he actually just sublets it during the winter break.
Seriously, does anyone not think of Dana Carvey in a wig and dress saying that…
Now isn’t that special…
About music types used in church. I think you have to look at the worldview displayed by the music. Most Jazz and blues have its roots in New Orleans and voodoo in the late 1800’s. In fact if you listen to some of the early jazz/blues it talks about how much they dislike life and God. Heavy Metal is fine in churches, I do not think that is the issue. I would say some of you like TFK or Pillar ect…Their music has a christian worldview for the most part unlike the bands that will be playing at this church. So the style of music itself is not evil, but the worldview it protrays in lyrics, dancing ect… can be evil. It is our duty to manifest the kingdom of God. This is done by making the invisible church visible.
Are these bands helping, correct worldviews that results in manifesting the kingdom of God? Just read what they sing and there attitude as reflected in their lives and I think it would have to be a big no!
chris p,
the only thing the church charges for is to cover heating and cooling costs, so your “making a buck” accusation doesn’t hold water.
Worldview displayed by the music through the lyrics and lifestyle of the musicians now – yes.
Worldview of the roots of the music then – irrelevant.
Neil
Actually, Kyle, the Blues and Jazz have their roots in the old Negro Spirituals.
Personally, I’ve always liked C.S. Lewis’ portrayal of Satan in The Screwtape Letters of having no real capacity to understand music. I’m not saying that some music can’t have demonic influence, but I think that at it’s root, music is a gift from God.
Mandy,
I think most reasonble and informed people would assume making a buck was not the issue given the ticket price is $4… operative words being “reasonable and informed.”
Musical styles aside, and the appropriateness of this concert notwithstanding… my issue with Tim’s post seems to have been missed or ignored in the flurry.
I think Tim should “update” his post to remove or recant the provocative statements, take the high ground by apologizing for them (thus distinguishing “us” from “them”), and let us discuss the issue at hand.
Neil
Neil
I do think orgins of music is important. Jazz became Rock’n'Roll which then became modern day metal and rock. Most of the views held by signers relate back to this and display the old worldview. Like the Stones when they went to Africa and record shamen drum beats. Or the yearly rock bands who took the old voodoo music and made it eletronic(not techno) like Stones, Beatles ect…They purposefully shout out the devil in Africa to add to their album. The roots of anything will teach a great deal. Foresst would compare them to shoes. You can tell where they been, where they are and where they are going. Jazz is not evil because its roots are in voodoo but it teaches you about the music now and what they signers are trying to tell us.
So are these bands protraying a christian worldview?
So basically you are saying the worldview of the composer sets the ontological spritual direction of a style of music.
How then would can we differential the worldviews and music of a Mozart and a Bach? Same genre, different worldviews?
“Next to the Word of God, the noble art of music is the greatest treasure in the world.”-M.Luther-
Music is awesome it truly does bring comfort to souls.
Phil
From everything I understood Jazz&Blues started in New Orleans around the 1880’s. In fact some of the greats in the early 1900’s where illigatmite childern of voodoo queens. i could be wrong but I will look it to it more.
Personally I love most of these types of music and it is a shame that their are not more christian to use these different styles. Do you know of any good Christ-centered jazz, blues ect.. musicians out there?? I know of the popular one, I want something with a lot of substance though?!
…or to look at it missiologically. Are we to go to a tribal people, convert them to Christ, then tell them to sing songs like ours because theirs is rooted in devil worship?
Neil,
Of course I wasn’t being serious, I’d hope most could tell that. However, Ingrid’s constant misinforming and sometimes deliberate slander at some point needs to be addressed. I can either point it out, yet again, or take her words at their face value. I opted for the second this time.
Neil
In a way yes. The set the tone and mode of the worldview they are protraying. They influence someone else and they also protray the same worldview ect…This does not mean that the music is evil but it does give us clues to where we been and where we are going with our music as a culture.
They are the same genre but have different worldviews. You can look at the writting and the lyrics. Plus I think most classical music grew out of the monestaries in the dark ages and would therefore have christian roots. I am not really sure, but that would be an intresting study. I think we mean the same thing. I am just trying to say that the roots of anything matter. Family trees, nations, music all has roots and if they have roots in bad soil then they produce bad trees.
You know, this whole thing reeks of Ingrid trying to “zing” Tim. That’s really Christlike.
Tim,
OK, sorry I missed the facetious nature of the post.
Neil
Neil
Yes, you do not want them using something that is assocatied closely for them with devil worship. You need to call them out and seprate them from their culture. Not make them relveant to the culture.
The worlview and purpose of the composer is all that matters. To tell a people that “their” music is evil based on the worlview of their ancestors is the height of ethnocentric arrogance.
Or as Steve Taylor would say “God’s music should be divine… try buying records like mine…”
I think your distinction between Mozart and Bach says it all – same genre, different reasons for composing.
Though I may not like my own example since I do not think a genre or even a song has to be “Chrsitian” to be glorifying to God…
Kyle,
Â
No, No, No… you let THEM decide what is proper and what is not. They have the same Holy Spirit.
To tell a people their music is evil, or their instruments are evil, or their haircuts are wrong – is paternalistic, arrogant, and wrong!
(BTW – all three of those were done by Anglo’s to the tribal peoples of the US…)
Neil
I think Paul had the same kind of problem except instead of music it was meat used in the temple. He said it is permissible to eat but it might casue our younger brothers to stumble. That is the same way I would see for music in any given culture. I know that missonaries for years and years have stuggled to get christian in Africa away from the pagan worldview as displayed mostly by their music and rituals. Is it arrogant to do this? To protect the weak brothers in faith from the snares and traps of the devil? No it is not. Also you are correct everything does glorify God but to do it properly you must have faith so that means only Christians music can properly glorify God.
Why where Jews told how to cut their hair?? Not to tattoo the body and to pirece it????
The brothers were not “younger” they were “weaker” – is that not correct?
Again, let their church decide, not impose our Western perspective on them.
I’ve seen to many peoples told that their way of doing things is evil because “we” don’t understand or like it.
Plus, you give Satan all the power – if someone uses a drum to worship him, we have no power to redeem it?
have we not gotten past the point of saying “the beat is evil?”
Ingid wrote:
” It seems Pastor Reed says that they just rent out the building. My response: A Church of Christ rents their building out to Satan?”
……………- isn’t that special?
What if they rented the building for an eating contest full of gluttons? Is that sin worse then death metal? I am just trying to figure out which sins rate the Satan moniker.
Jazz is not evil because its roots are in voodoo but it teaches you about the music now and what they signers are trying to tell us.
Well… by that logic, hymns shouldn’t be sung either, right?
I mean, many of them are/were based off of old drinking songs, right?
So I guess that means that when we sing hymns we are somehow supporting drunkenness. Or something like that.
Here’s an interesting thought to add to the conversation. My church rents a nightclub on Sunday nights… one of the most infamous night clubs in Los Angeles. We have to cover up pictures that are plastered all over the place that are way beyond pornography every week. It smells of stale beer and sweat (sometimes puke).
Are we in error because we use a facility that is know for such debauchery? Does the argument go both ways?
If this is carried out to its fullest extent on all music, instruments, genres, and styles…
Really. Talk about your splitting hairs. We’ll be singing a capella, and with an allowable range of maybe five notes that have never before been associated with anything evil. The hymnal is going to be a lot smaller.
Churches don’t charge rent for that; we do it for free. We call them “fellowship dinners.”
Interesting comment, Nathan.
My initial thought (and I have to get going — in a hurry here) is that it is more like “reclaiming” ground rather than losing ground, i.e. the difference between “go into the world and preach the Gospel” (emphasis on the “go into”) rather than let the world encroach.
I’d like to flesh this out more, but I need to run. I’m sure you guys will hash it out….
I bet if Tim had an orchestra or choir that sang classical music, Ingrid would have no issue… even if many of the orchestra or choir were openly gay…
I mean what was the choir she was promoting called a while back? It was so great to her but it was “secular” and it was the most God honoring “music” she had heard.
Sad, really at the ongoing slander and double standard… gay people are accepted to sing God’s praises and that is fine with Ingrid, yet a church being open to the community… is a sin.
Weird to me!
iggy
Nathan,
SHOOT – just when I thought everything was nicely compartmentalized, you add an interesting twist.
Thanks… I really mean it, thanks.
Neil
(avoiding the question)
So I finally got off work and got home and was able to “listen” to these two bands…
I know The Church isn’t a building…and I know you don’t support their “music” Tim, so to speak…
But coming from a muscians standpoint….I’d never let these people within 6 miles of a church building I ran LOL. I don’t consider this music, it’s off my radar of things I’d consider ‘musical’.
It’s my personal opinion that these bands sound TERRIBLE LOL. Evil sounding? Yeah…definitely.
I know, it seems jarring to have bands like this play at a church building, but we have to consider the positives. I think some have been considered here.
Along with the negatives.
Joe
Dave
What hymns where based are bar songs??? The only one I know of is of course Luther. What most people do not know is that he went back and wrote his own music for the song because he thought it inappropriate.
Again I am not saying that this style is better blah blah blah…You guys are like me only seeing trees in the forest. My point is that origins of anything matter. To say this is not so is absurd. Why is it so hard to say that the way any movement started is important?
Nathan
No that seems good to me. Take something used for Satan and then use it for God! Taking something that is unholy and using it for holy purposes is good. But taking something used for holy purpose and using it for unholy, well that is bad.
We are the temple of Christ. In the shadows of the OT would it be acceptable to sing praises to a false god. No so why is it now acceptable?? That all for now you guys have a great night. If you live in Iowa get out and caucus.
I should clarify, I wouldn’t let them within 6 miles of any church building I ran in order to play their “music”.
LOL =)
“Take something used for Satan and then use it for God! Taking something that is unholy and using it for holy purposes is good.”
Exactly! So it is fine to do the same with instruments and musical genres as well – right?
Neil
“Why is it so hard to say that the way any movement started is important?”
Because, when it comes to musical styles, the way it started is irrelevant since there is nor ontological fixing of its “oughtness.”
Using your logic, electric guitars are out, since their origins are obviously evil. What of other things?
Hi Kyle in WI,
Rock n’ Roll came from Blues. Jazz is a completely different fork.
You know what? I actually agree with you. There’s no difference between doing a “Christian” wedding for a fornicating couple and a death metal band playing there. In Australia the law is if you let someone use a building you need to let everyone use it, but I’m not sure if it’s the same there though?
Dave,
There were no hymns based of “bar” songs. Luther had one or two popular melodies, but he recanted and changed them. The myth comes from the musical form which happens to be called “bar song”.
Tim, have you forgiven Ingrid yet for her post about the swear word?
You have repented, let it go.
pastorboy,
Has Ingrid forgiven Tim… that is the real question. And if you are supporting Ingrid, have you asked her to repent and stop her continued sin against Tim?
Tim is the victim of Ingrid’s sin… do you not agree with that?
Tim most probably has forgiven Ingrid, but does that mean Tim must just let Ingrid continue in her slander and sinful ways?
iggy
Julie,
I agree that in your culture this might be wrong. How can I not agree, I know nothing about your culture so I’ll take your word for it. Secondly, I’ll agree that in Ingrid’s culture it might be wrong. Your forgetting the most important culture to this conversation though, and that is Owosso and Tim’s. Just as I cannot pronounce what your culture is like, Mrs. Schlueter cannot judge Tim’s culture. Turn about is fair play as someone said.
Iggy, I was refering to a comment Tim made regarding that whole thing again on this stream. Does it matter if she has? Forgiveness is for you, so that you are not controlled by that other person, and the bitterness does not destroy your life.
I am not defending Ingrid, I am concerned for you, for Tim, and for Ingrid if you are harboring sinful bitterness. Tim has repented. Its over. No need to rehash it again.
Were not the ODM’s suggesting that churches that rent movie theatres bringing Hollywood into their worship when all they were actually doing was renting a facility with a bunch of seating?
pastorboy,
Keep going Bro, maybe you can get through to these folks. As for me and especially when dealing with Iggy: I say “I like baked beans” and Iggy says, “You support Ingrid, repent!”.
It looks like you are getting the same treatment. Ingrid was right on with this one guys. And she was NOT teaching that THE Church is four walls. Niether is my home, it is something deeper. All the same, I would not for example rent out my house to a pedophile for his “work” while I am not using it, simply because he tells me God told him to do it. Despicable.
The fact that some of you guys are after her on this one is absolutely ridiculous, slanderous, and just plain wrong. ‘Nuf said. If you find this offensive, it should be. I am not ashamed.
Some of you at least have said that they would not let the band near their church for at least poor musical quality reasons, good. But not quite good enough.
And speaking of stalking? How many posts have been about Ingrid and Ken. In fact, was this entire site not set up to moniter and counteract them? I stalking okay once it goes back the other direction?
I really do hope you guys can see at least some of the ridiculousness of posts like this.
S.J. Walker out
Did you just compare renting the church to a band as the same as renting out a house to a pedophile? Really, and honestly that’s the same thing to you?
I really do hope you can see the incongruity in that analogy.
It was a purposeful exageration Joe. Don’t be toooo literal. My pint is that even though I know that a Church or my home are not, essentially the literally walls and doors and so forth, it does not mean that will rent either facility God has given and called me to be a steward of to wickedness of any kind.
I’m not saying that the kind of music is wrong. What they sang/sing is wrong and has no place in the church–figuratively and literally. Capiche?
Neil
Again you are missing what I am saying. Read my lips. It is important to know where stuff comes from period! Music styles, genre, instrument ect.. are not inherently evil. The way they are used is either good or evil. Is the band a good band, not musically, but is there message the good news? No so the church is letting evil rent it bottom line.
You know something this sounds like the same exact arguments about “O Holy Night.”
So just to be clear music is not evil only the way it is used is evil. It is still important to understand history. Are these two statements opposed to each other or am I missing something?????????
The church could have it ’s doors open 24/7 for prayer, to serve meals to the homless, give away clothes to the destitute, to offer hope…INSTEAD they “rent out their building” (i.e…to generate funds) and you see what the House of God gets……good thing we have the new covenant otherwise if the Ark of the Covenant was in this House it would melt the musicians if they bumped into it. No the House of the Lord is a place where people “come to play”…literally….
By the way, why is Ossowo hosting a death metal band that plays I AM MALICE?????????????????
It don’t add up….but then….the church in America is becoming apostate
SJ,
No, actually you state that Ingrid is wrong then state something that I stated in out of context… and then act like I should be fine with it…
But really again, water under the bridge so why still insist on mischaracterizing me?
Really, you need to go and re-read Ingrid’s post, as she is stating that the “church” is a building…
1. This is not as Ingrid is stating a church sponsored event… so Ingrid saying that Tim’s “church” is sponsoring it.. is a lie at best.
2. Or, Ingrid is stating that the building is sponsoring an event… which is just rather weird.
Now, Ingrid also stated this:
So, the church building is being rented out, to what Ingrid considers “entertainment now resembles a rehearsal for hell That is, in fact, what it is”… which is still implying that it is a church sponsored event and it is not.
Now, if Ingrid wanted to contact Tim as she should and ask questions as to what is going on there… then the only issue would be, should a church rent their building out for public events?
That is an entirely different and legitimate issue.
But, I suppose all you will hear from all that is “I say “I like baked beans†and Iggy says, “You support Ingrid, repent!â€.
pastorboy,
It is not over as apparent to this recent attack piece by Ingrid… she is still in sin. I am not stating she is not saved but only that she is called to repentance over her malicious attacks on other fellow servants of God… (Romans 14:4) Since Ken and Ingrid do this publicly then they need be called out publicly and this site is doing just that… not out of bitterness, but out of a sense of Godly justice that mercy may prevail.
I have no bitterness toward Ingrid. In fact I am only saddened by her and pray only blessing for her… so I think you are missing some things here about the people here. We are standing against bullies who abuse others in the Name of Jesus. If you think that wrong then we can discuss that as another issue. The only “bitter” person is Ken and Ingrid who seem to hold grudges and lack any grace toward others… and all I get is people like you who do not hold her to account but think they need to hold me to account went I am not even bitter… angry that one would sully the Name of Jesus with self righteousness and call it God’s righteousness… and promote a lie from Hell more insidious that death metal Christian bands.
I see that so many want to “care for us”, but still turn a blind eye to the real issue… and that is stopping those who openly sin and bear false witness against others.
If you still take that as “iggy just says, Ingrid needs to repent.” then whatever, apparently the truth of the situation is being lost on you and SJ.
I see that what Ingrid and Ken are doing to so many brothers and sisters in Christ comes from hate. I have talked to Ken and have had run ins with Ingrid and many others who write at CRN…
I quote the words of Peter that seem so lost in so many peoples theology today… “God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.” I do not call Ingrid or Ken as anything less than my brother and sister in Christ… I do not even call them unclean or impure. I only hold them accountable for their words and ministry and pray that they will come to their senses and use their position to honor Jesus instead of defame Him Name.
iggy
At least I know not to take you seriously. You didn’t even bother to read what you’re commenting on as in the original article I noted that the only charge was to pay for the heating/cooling costs associated with events.
Kyle,
OK – Re: genres of music – I agree knowing the history is important, but the ultimate test is the current use by the particular person or group.
Yes, I agree!:)
So are those bands christian? That is the question. Is what they portray a christian worldview? If yes then the church is doing good. If no then the church is doin bad!
Do the birthday parties hosted under the same provision have to “portray a christian worldview” too?
Iggy, all I am saying is that even if Ingrid or Ken continues in the slander as you call it, shouldn’t you or the one offended just forgive and move on? Isn’t that the way of Jesus?
Slander, by the way, is stating something that is untrue about a person. It seems that many of these watchdog ministries that are commented on on this site have actual quotes, clippings, radio transcripts, etc. that they compare to scripture. Call it what you will, but it does not rise up to the level of slander. It rises to the level of criticism. If the criticism isn’t valid, then simply move on with your life. Why allow people to control you?
T.J.
There’s this section of the Scriptures called the New Testament…you should read it. God actually does not reside in walls in that part. There is no “house of God” in the New Covenant. There are just four walls and a roof where the houses of God meet.
Tim Reed’s comment was so true and so important and so “relevant” that it must be posted again:
“You essentially have two choices. You can wall of your church and buy a bunch of members-only jackets, or you can be a part of your community. My church has chosen the second. Then again we want to be in people’s lives, as opposed to being so irrelevant that we’re exiled to the internet where we spend all day cyber-stalking anyone who disagrees with us.”
Anyone know of any pictures of Mr Silva on line? I have seen the author slice, but I have not seen Mr Silva. Any help?
you won’t find his pic. They are non-existant.
Oddly enough, Ingrid actually looks like Dana Carvey as the Church Lady. She’s morphing into a cliche!
But all kidding aside, here’s what I find really interesting about Ingrid’s moralizing about what goes on within the church’s walls when church is not in session. I wonder if she holds her Daddy and his TV station to the same level of judgemental intolerance. When WVCY TV is off the air from midnight to mid morning, the air time is brokered out. A lot of the typical shows, but every now and then I’ve fallen asleep on the couch and woke up to some pretty contemporary (secular) sounding music and girls in some pretty snug leotards demonstrating excercise and fitness equipment.
Now this by itself is no big deal. The part I find amusing is that Uncle Vic (Ingrid’s Dad) is the same guy who, on his radio show one day, railed against some poor convenience store owner for his use of a cardboard display of a young woman in basically the same attire holding up a six pack of beer. Poor Vic. Just like Ingrid and her Yellow Sign hysteria, ol’ Vic was shocked and scandalized. I wonder if he’s ever recovered. And I wonder if he’s aware of the mildly titillating fare that runs on his station after hours. But more importantly…does Ingrid know?
But then again, maybe its ok when a much needed revenue stream needs to be maximized. And it goes without saying, if I’m wrong about his licensed hours and brokered time agreements, I apologize.
No, Joe. I did not forget that. I actually accounted for the fact that the different cultures were likely different, and stated as much. The question of what is “permissible” in the culture wasn’t the question, I said. I believe I made that clear.
It wasn’t a question of whether Tim could do this, whether it was “allowed” by God or not — that seems to be Ingrid’s argument, not mine — but rather, if he should. All that culture stuff aside (which was used to show why Ingrid might react in a way that questioned the permissibility, rather than the benefit), the real question was whether he should do this, whether it was beneficial to the reputation of the church, and, consequently, any future witness or work that the church might do.
This is a fine point: not whether we are allowed to do something, but whether we should. Now, Tim has made the decision that he should. I’m not agreeing with Ingrid’s attack on this. And frankly, I’m not agreeing that Tim should rent out the church building like this either — but that’s neither here nor there. I’m merely pointing out that what seemed to be getting lost was the question of whether it is a good idea to have a band in a church that sings about death and dismemberment.
For the record, I did not suggest this had anything to do with musical genres, whether this would damn Tim to hell, or that it was congruent upon cultural definitions in a general cross-section of the country. Those are distraction arguments — this stuff about jazz and pedophiles and music roots — that has nothing, really, to do with the topic at hand. Those are just distractions.
Everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial.
you’re right nathan, that’s why I said it’s a good thing we are in the NEW COVENANT. The music being played by “christian” death metal bands does NOT GLORIFY GOD,,,thus the reference to melting when bumping into the ARk like the poor chap who stumbled while the ARK of the Covenant was traveling down the road, brazenly thrown on an ox cart instead of CARRIED ON POLES.
THE POINT IS……..the death metal bands are a brazen attempt at “worship” music to the LIVING GOD. And everyone can justify Yellow Sign and all the other demonic bands. When a group opens up a set with “Welcome to Hell”……I’m outta there!!!
Yellow Sign is not a “christian” band… in fact I do not even see that Once we were buried is a “Christian” band… form all evidence I see the only one that is stating these are “Christian” bands, is Ingrid… to that, as one who run an online radio station, I can tell pretty fast if it is a “Christian” band or not.
I am not saying that members of either bands might not have a Christian in them, yet as I look at these bands they do not show any evidence of trying to present themselves as “Christian”… and most will if they are this hardcore… and they will most often be in your face about it.
I have come across many great bands who sound like this… the guys are genuine and consider themselves to be evangelist in their outreach. For, most, God is the center and core of why they do what they do.
So as far as accuracy, Ingrid seems to just not be doing close enough research. I have taken the time to find out if this band is actually “Christian” or not… I will let you know what I find out… but I already think I have the answer.
iggy
But Julie, your original point seemed to be calling us to look at this from Ingrid’s culture. (Perhaps I misread it–I just re-read it and came to the same conclusion) What I am saying is this has nothing to do with Ingrid. She’s looking for dirt, that’s it. She’s scouring the internet or having people do it for her so she can as Jim Burblitz put it, “Mark” him. I’ll grant you this might not be a go in your culture or hers but that’s the beauty of it, it’s not happening in your culture or hers. It is happening in Tim’s and unless Ingrid can somehow produce verses that the overall policy of renting out the building to the community is bad she is simply gossiping.
T.J.
sorry about that. I jumped the gun. I just don’t beleive that there is any type of music that is inherantly evil or cannot be used as worship. I toured in a rock band that was not Christian. We had very clean and positive lyrics, but played alongside very vulger band. We made so many relationships with non believers and many came to faith becasue of it.
But… we had protestors at many of our shows. Guess who they were– Christians who thought what we were doing was sinfun.
I guess I see alot of this from a very differet perspective.
Troy,
Actually, he cleansed the four-walled ‘building’ because people were being excluded from it in order for religious leaders to make more money… Additionally, we (the church) are the temple – it is no longer made of brick and mortar…
Let’s take a few steps back, beyond brick and mortar, walls, who specifically said or did whatever, and look at the principle involved.
I would point out a couple of examples from the bible. Lot and Abraham separated. Lot pitched his tent near Sodom. Who would’ve thought over the course of time Lot would go from being an outsider on the plains near Sodom to a resident tending the gate? That he would later offer his daughters to satisfy the sexual desires of the men of the town? I doubt Lot could’ve seen any of that coming. But compromise doesn’t happen happen overnight.
Over in Revelation we see two letters via John from Jesus to Pergamum and Thyatira. One church compromised the truth, the other was too tolerant of false teachings. It wasn’t that everyone was doing it, but possibly that some members were turning a blind eye to other members’ involvement in those practices (there are any number of ways you can work that out).
To me, it’s not an issue of who is using the building, but more a matter of who is providing a platform for those groups’ messages to get out, and are those messages hostile to the Gospel?
Tim can answer whether they “lease to anyone” for the sake of community and because they have space to do so (my paraphrase) includes the Lion’s Den off I-69, the local chapters of NARAL, NAMBLA, the Klan, some swingers club, a wiccan group, or some GLBT rally.
Granted, I think a major problem with many churches is that they’re closed more than they’re open. But you have to make sure you don’t go so far the other way as to lose your distinctives and become obligated to accommodate everyone.
I think the observation that Jesus cleared out a temple because it was being misused tells us the mind of God on this. God pretty clearly means for His property to be set apart for His purposes. I don’t recollect His endorsement of any entertainers in the pages between Malachi and Revelation, or His approval of the use of any temple properties for secular events. What is ambiguous or difficult to understand about that? Tim
The need that many “leaders” in churches these days seem to have to “meet the world on the worlds’s terms” appears to me to be problematic on many levels. For one thing, it isn’t scriptural. Jesus NEVER did it, as far as I can tell. In fact, my recollection is that He did exactly the opposite: His dictum to the world was (and is) that the world must meet Him on HIS terms. There is no other way, and man has no other hope. Meeting God on Gods’ terms never meant inviting the world into the church so that the world might use church assets for wordly ends. The only reason the world was ever invited by Christ into a synagogue was that the world would be changed…a deadly spirit would be cast out or a withered hand would be made whole.
Not only is the practice of meeting the world on its’ terms not scriptural, it doesn’t work. The world was not in Hesus’ day, is not now and never will be changed by agreeing with it and endorsing its’ activities. Tim
Oops…that would be Jesus, not Hesus. Sorry… Tim
Oh Timothy, and I mean OH! Timothy, rewording Jesus and the money changers shows a rather agenda (dare I say purpose?) driven agenda.
O Tim,
Probably the best interpretation on why Jesus cleared the Temple was because of the practice of the leaders in pushing the non-Jewish pilgrims out of the Gentile court to make room for (dishonest) buying and selling. Here is a more detailed explanation.
All of the world is “God’s property” – a building rented, owned or used by a groups of believers is not ‘holy ground’. Rather, the Temple ceased being “God’s address” on the day of Pentecost when we, the believers, became the Temple.
You might note that Jesus taught in the synagogues of Galilee, and that the early church also met in the synagogue as well – with archaeological evidence in several places throughout Asia Minor that this lasted into the late third century. Synagogues were used for worship and Torah study on Sabbath, for school during during parts of the week, and as community centers where any group could meet during the remainder of the week, including singing, debate and other common activities (including entertainment).
The Temple, as noted above, was treated differently, because it was (symbolically) where God dwelt on earth. On Pentecost, 33 A.D., that changed, and God’s address changed from a House of stone to one of flesh.
Jesus was part and parcel a member of the culture he lived in, and there is a multitude of evidence that he used the context of that culture to teach and spread his message. We know that he engaged in the theological debates of his day (a primary activity of ‘rabbis’) in their fashion of debate. We have record of Jesus (in scripture) weighing in on each of the eight key debates listed by Josephus. We have his eating (the most intimate of non-sexual activity in his culture) with sinners, and traveling to places shunned by his culture (the Decapolis).
We have Paul, who was “all things to all men so that by all possible means [he] might save some.”
There are numerous examples.
Again, you are missing both the concept that the building is not the church and that the early church HAD no ‘assets’.
Actually, one of the first records we have where Jesus would have been in a synagogue was during the wedding feast where he turned water to wine.
Now, I would humbly suggest that if you are not part of Tim’s church, you have no business sticking your nose into this matter.
OK.
I’ve said what I believe is true and what I believe scripture supports. I’m not going to be talked out of it, your protestations notwithstanding.
My question to you would be: Why stop at heavy metal bands? Why not go ahead and allow abortion support groups to use your facilities? Or anarchists? Or groups that advance and support homosexual causes? Or support groups which support euthanizing sick, old people? Based on what you’ve attempted to support by bringing in anecdotal and questionable archeology (which, by the way, just so happens to support your position…how convenient. I wonder if you’d mention any of these “finds” if they supported the position Christ took?), is there ANY point at which you would draw the line and say no?
I suspect not.
So be it ~ I think you’re wrong about it. In any case, given that there 3 dozen posts on this topic, I’d say there is sufficient doubt to warrant erring on the side of safety. Tim
Read the threads Tim, you’re covering ground already covered. Praise be to God, that Tim Reed, Owosso Mi answers to God and not you. I think you’re wrong. Thankfully, it doesn’t matter what either of us think.
Chris, what a typically dismissive and horrible thing to say. When you don’t happen to like or agree with what someone says, you stick your tongue out like a kid and scream”go away” at the top of your lungs. Oooh, what an effective debate technique this is. I “stuck my nose in” because this is a discussion, and I’m not about to be dismissed by an emotional 12 year old like you. I intend to make observations about what “churches” like Tims’ are doing the same way you feel free to do. If you don’t like what I’m saying, how about having the courage to refute it (if you can) like an adult? This is what we need in christianity today: More people who tell others to “butt out” whenever they don’t happen to like something someone says. Tim
Timothy,
The questions you asked seem valid on the surface, yet….
Would God ask a true prophet of God to marry a whore?
Would God ask a prophet to walk naked around a city for around a year?
Would God let His own Son be murdered? (Abortion after birth)
Does God allow the “unclean” to enter the Holy of Holies?
I think sometimes people miss that God often does what He ought not as far as our thoughts, yet He seems to have a plan and still be sovereign through the whole thing. Maybe we need trust in what God is telling Tim R. and see what He has planned?
Just a thought.
Be blessed,
iggy
OT,
The reason I’m not engaging you on the issue is that it has already been beaten to death on this thread, this one and elsewhere. There is no edification or use in retreading the conversation, particularly when you’ve already indicated:
Basically indicating that you’re not going to give up idolizing a building as if it were holy ground…
Tim’s already made it clear that such groups would not be allowed.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re referring to here, but when I read books/attend lectures on the early history of the church, I don’t look for things that ‘happen to support my position’. In the case of the use of the Temple and Jesus’ clearing of it, I have heard multiple interpretations, originally believing it was because there was buying and selling going on there. The expulsion of the Gentiles from the outer courts (documented in a number of contemporary sources), and the scriptural account of the cleansing, including Jesus’ words and the supporting OT passages, give this interpretation of motivation (did you read the link?) the greatest likelihood of being correct. Even so, the traditional interpretation regards the local synagogue (which was not exclusively used for worship/study) – and not the Temple – as congruent to a church building, which would make your comparison moot.
No, but it does need more people willing to stand up to gossipmongers and uninvolved busybodies who try to interfere with matters best left up to the local church (which is being discussed in this thread).
It’s already been done, multiple times in other threads, and there is no edification in continuing, no matter how many aspersions you wish to demean your brothers in Christ with…
FYI – I do not mind discussing the concepts of “church buildings” (which were not built or owned by churches until around the time that Constantine declared Christianity as the ‘official’ Roman religion in 325 A.D.) and whether or not they are ‘holy ground’, or what, regarding the Temple, itself, is relevant to how we worship today.
What I’m not going to discuss, and what is really none of your business, is anything going on at a rather tiny church in the Michigan countryside., and which was dug up, not out of any Christian concern, but was simply a misguided attempt to dig up dirt on a writer here.
OT,
You “suspect” that the individuals here would draw no lines in what kinds of groups they’d let in for use of the church, including anarchists and those who engage in euthanasia.
First, that’s a lie. I “suspect” that you know with 100% certainty that no one would justify letting criminals in the door, providing them sanctuary, and thereby committing a crime.
Second, what you wrote was the sickest, least charitable, and most dastardly thing I think I’ve seen written on these pages. Congrats, that’s saying something.
Some of the people who post here are either pretty wicked, or have such a loose handle on reality that they are in need of professional help.
I think my previous comment was harsher than necessary. OT, I am sorry if you were offended.
In all things, there needs to be more charity given and more grace extended.
M.G.