Radical Dreamer (post: 1446077) wrote:(I specify America because other countries don't consider that way of worship "traditional" at all)
blkmage (post: 1446091) wrote:This.
It dawned on me about a year ago how incredibly dumb the eternal battle of traditional vs. contemporary worship music is because it's assumed that those are the only two choices. And it should be incredibly obvious that they are not. When we get into an argument about the best way to worship, what we're saying isn't that our way is better than the other way, but our way is better than all the other ways around the world.
I mean, worship in the early church would look nothing like any service we'd be used to. For one thing, anything we'd consider to be worshipping music hasn't even been developed yet. And that's not to mention the implicit expectation that churches in, say, eastern Europe, Africa, the Middle East, or eastern and southern Asia would develop worship services that we'd be immediately comfortable in. Why would they?
Nate (post: 1445882) wrote:It can be all three of those things. It's not a "pick one and only one" choice. Otherwise we'd still think wearing 50% cotton/50% polyester shirts and being clean-shaven was a sin and that you'd have to condemn your house if it had mold in it. You can base your beliefs on the Bible, AND reason, AND on philosophy. It isn't hard to do!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 108 guests