Jesus has been portrayed in many ways throughout the history of the church, and in pop-culture. Portrayals vary from the super freakish looking midieval Catholic Jesus, which looks like a mini-me version of a child with an adult face, to the pretty eyed, highly feminine, never angry, walking in fields of wild flowers drag-queen Jesus of many of the so called “Jesus movies.” In today’s pop-culture crazed world, Jesus takes on the appeal of a drinking buddy, someone who likes to get just as crazy as the rest of the crowd, but who also (like the Dos Equis man) can still drive everyone else home safely at the end of the night. There is a popular t-shirt on the market which reads, “Jesus is My Homeboy.”

With all of the various ideas about who Jesus really is out there, discerning which characterization is correct can be quite confusing. Sometimes its hard to know if we should bow down and worship him, or bow down to look at his new Prada unisex high-heeled shoes and matching handbag! What are we to make of all this exactly?

I think Jesus can clear up any confusion as to who he is. Jesus said, ”I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62). When Jesus used the term “I AM,” he was clearly (at least in the minds of Jews who immediately tried to kill him for his ‘blasphemy’) identifying himself as Yahweh, the Old Testament God of Israel, who created the world and governs it according to his soveriegn will. Son of Man, as Jesus used the term, was a reference to the Messiah who would one day come in the fiery clouds of heaven to deliver his people and execute judgment on the people of the earth for their sins. Clearly, Jesus was not confused about his own identity. Controversial, but not confused.

So, what does this mean for us today? We must accept Jesus for who he really is (who he said he is), and worship him accordingly. We must love, serve, and worship Jesus in a manner that is acceptable to him, and not according to our own ideas about who his is and how to approach him.

Vintage Worship is committed to exploring all the ways in which we may worship the real Jesus in a manner acceptable and pleasing to him. To him be glory forever. Amen.

Does your church use language such as, “Celebrate Jesus” on Sunday mornings? Is that the only language they use? The following is an excerpt from an article critiquing the modern church’s use of Celebration-only language in worship.

More and more churches seem to be moving toward this kind of language to describe what happens during corporate worship. I’m not convinced it’s a good thing. Now I’m not saying Jesus–and the infinitely good news associated with his death and resurrection–is unworthy of our celebration. But I do worry that “celebrate” is an inadequate word to describe the response we should have to the Lord of the universe.

Read rest of article here.

I agree with the author. While celebrating who Jesus is and what he has done for us (there are many examples of redeemed souls celebrating before the Lord in Scripture), the language of celebration implies that the worshipper is smiling, laughing, and happy all of the time. Otherwise, one does not worship. I prefer the term “worship.” We worship Jesus in the body life of our churches, not only when we are in a celebratory mood, but also when we are sad, or mourning, or tired, or sick, or a million others things when we come together in corporate worship.

Don’t just celebrate Jesus, worship him!

It can be easy for worship team members to fall into the trap of “winging it”.  Showing up, listening to the songs for 30-60 minutes during a 120 minute rehearsal and looking over a chord chart for the first time is not productive rehearsal time. A nice reminder to my fellow worship leaders & team members out there about the calling, the necessity and the importance for each worship team member to actively participate in the mission God has called your local church’s worship ministry to fulfill (not just the guy behind the mic).

Check out the rest of the article here.

In this video interview Matt Redman, one of today’s foremost Christian songwriters candidly displays regret for some of his past song lyrics. He is concerned that lyrics such as, “Jesus I am so in love with you” in his song Let My Words Be Few might not be an appropriate or scriptural way to speak to our King Jesus. I think he’s right.

True worship? What does that mean, exactly? Here is an excerpt from an article on worhip by Brian Doerksen, worship leader, songwriter, and author of Hallelujah (Your Love Is Amazing):

Some people get scared when they hear they’ll be worshipping forever. Maybe they don’t like singing, and they were told that eternity is one continuous sing-along! I believe eternity will be one continuous adventure…and I believe that songs and acts of worship will be woven into the adventure. I don’t really know what it’s going to look like, but it’s going to be better than anything we could imagine or dream up! “No eye has seen, nor ear has heard, and no mind has imagined what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Corinthians 2:9 NLT).

God is preparing some amazing things that we can’t even imagine. Who is God preparing these things for? Those who love him! That’s a pretty compelling reason to keep “loving God” at the top of our lists and in the center of our hearts.

The heart of worship is loving God. And just like the word love means more than just sentimental feelings, so the word worship is a grand, robust word meaning so much more than singing. True worship springs from our affections and is confirmed by our actions. It is anchored by our understanding and sustained by our spiritual passion.

Worship is living out the words of Jesus quoted from the Torah: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” (Mark 12:30.

So if worship is much more than singing a song, what is it specifically?

Read the rest of the article here.

Stetzer’s argument:

No music exists in a vacuum. The association test asks the question, “Does the song unnecessarily identify with things, actions, or people that are contrary to Christianity?” An otherwise good song may be rejected because of its associations with ungodly people, or worldliness, etc.

The Lifeway article asserts:

My experience has been that you can drive yourself crazy trying to figure out such things [i.e. all of the associations that may surround a particular song or genre]. I’ve known folks who associate ungodliness with all sorts of artistic expression (from dance to instrumentation to the color of one’s shirt in the pulpit). How much is the worship leader responsible for others’ associations? The church I’m currently a part of uses contemporary worship music, but comes out of an a capella tradition. I don’t know how we could have ever plucked a note if we were bound to these seven tests.

Now, I wouldn’t want to go head to head with Ed, but I take his words with a grain of salt. First, although he plays guitar, he is not tasked with the challenges of routinely choosing musical material for worshipers. Second, as my friend Dave Durham likes to point out, Jesus came to restore all things (Colossians 1:15-20). Surely this includes art, music, and even culture itself. Our artistic palette with which to worship Him is vast, my friends. He has come to restore all things.

The following is my reply to both:

I think Ed is mainly speaking of “obvious” associations a song or tune may have with something ungodly (e.g. setting the lyrics of Amazing Grace to the tune of House Of The Rising Sun). I would not do that in our culture either. I do agree, however, that throwing out an entire genre of music b/c of its negative associations would be going too far (as in the case of the Jamaicans refusing to use Reggae for worship music b/c of its association with drug culture). The Jamaican church should seek to redeem Reggae (and the people of the drug culture-to which end this practice may help!). I once spoke with a pastor who hated singing contemporary worship songs because the chord progressions reminded him of the Beetles! A little more digging and I soon discovered that his dislike was based on a preference for the sort of country/rockabilly chord progressions that focus on the 3 major chords in a key and exclude any minor chords.

Third Day is a great example of a music style (i.e. Southern Rock/Alternative) that could conjure up thoughts of ungodly culture due to its association (and identification) with honky tonks, drukeness, drugs, sex, etc. However, in the case of Third Day, the lyrics to the songs are so blatantly Christian that my mind rarely (if ever) goes there. And I have, in my younger years, had a great deal of experience in the Southern Rock, good ole boy culture! Third Day was the first Christian band to be allowed to play for the U.S. troops stationed overseas. That’s awesome! I hardly think that would have happened if Third Day sounded less like Southern Rock and more like Sacred Church Choir music!

I also think about the more recent “invasion” of Christian rappers, seeking to redeem the hip hop and rap genres for the glory of God (e.g. Flame, Lacrae, Cross Movement, etc.). There are obvious ungodly associations with the Rap music genre. I would never (and I don’t think these artists would either) set Christian lyrics to Snoop Dogg’s Gin And Juice (just dated myself, I know!), or use the tune of a popular 50-Cent song in the musical worship life of the church I lead. But I also would not disqualify those musical genres from said worship life because the those ungodly artists! The Christian artists mentioned above are blatantly Christian, and their musical genre helps spread the gospel to people that otherwise may not take it seriously, or even hear it at all.

I agree with Stetzer in principle. Put your song selections through “the association test.” But don’t disqualify an entire genre based on its use by the devil. The church is tasked with taking the gospel to culture, not conforming every culture to our own.

Feel free to agree or disagree in the comments section.

Great article here from the noted historian Mark Noll on the history of American Hymnody. Says Noll:

In New England, the progress of evangelical revival, especially as recorded in the defining accounts of Jonathan Edwards, was also a progress in song. Edwards was an early, if moderate, supporter of the reforms that from the early 1720s were replacing New England’s “Rsual” singing (psalms lined out and sung haphazardly with great local variation) with “Regular” singing (psalms and even hymns sung in harmony, sometimes with musical accompaniment). In his earliest account from May 1735 of the awakening that had begun in his Northampton, Massachusetts, parish late the previous year, Edwards reported that “no part of public worship has commonly [had] such an effect on [the people] as singing God’s praises.”

Check out the rest of this brief article at Worship Leader Magazine.

If you think that the “Worship Wars” are something new, think again. At one time in history the “old hymns” were new. They were also new and threatening to the traditions of the established church. Regarding the controversial nature of these “new” songs Noll states:

The hymnody of the evangelical revivals did, in fact, innovate in other matters also. Not surprisingly, innovation in metaphor, meter, and psychological fire encountered stiff opposition, some for scriptural reasons, some out of class resentment, and some because of what was perceived to be unacceptable style.

I’m pretty sure there’s something here for us all to learn . . .