Stop playing Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation Music at Cedarville

I am an alumni, and I have thought this since I was at Cedarville. Never thought about a petition though.

While I won't make the claim that every worship song that is not from these churches is still theologically sound, I believe that it is important to worship with music that is not associated with current heresies and cults. Worship is a beautiful practice of the Christian faith, and it is just as important to carefully examine a song's theological connections as any other practice in the church, or chapel in this case.

No more! We are to worship God in truth, not their waterdown, human centered, theologically errant music. I'm not calling for puritan hymns, just music that is God centered and God glorifying!

Amen! Finally some like minded people who can see through their smoke and mirrors!

4 years ago Featured

Music communicates theology! We need to be discerning of what the lyrics are saying. Vague and emotionally driven lyrics do little to teach us worship our Lord rightly! A person's music will only ever be a sound as their knowledge of our God. This is why it is imperative we select what we listen to, sing and worship with together carefully!

My grandpa died at the beginning of the semester. During that time, it wasn't the emotional lyrics that comforted me. It was the Biblical truths about Christ who conquered death in the songs we sang in chapel that brought me peace. I wonder what my life would be like if every day I got to sing the wonderful doctrine and praises in scripture instead of shallow music (which shares an odd resemblance to the repetition of Buddhist mantras by the way). After all, it is the music that sticks in my head long after chapel has finished. What would our lives look like if we not only learned how to live the Christian life from our classes and personal study but also from the very lyrics we sing each day? I see no problem with being vigilant in this area of worship, especially when the evidence is so clearly against these bands, and I sincerely hope this cause is heeded.

Thank you for your taking the time to respond. This will be my final comment on this matter as I have nothing let to say, that I have not already said in any of my numerous comments in this comment section. I got the lyrics of "Awesome God". Mixed up with the lyrics of "Such an Awesome God". This is why I didn't see any evidence of the claim that "God is selfless" within the song. Do you really think that the point of saying "so selfless" is to say that humans are receiving God's glory? It's a stretch to pull that kind of conclusion from that phrase. With the line, you mentioned from "Grace to Grace", what do you mean the heart and soul have not worth? Do you mean to say that's God's creation is worthless? The Omniscient God created humanity with the foreknowledge that we would sin and be in rebellion against Him. Yet He still created us as His image-bearers and put a plan into place from the beginning to save us from our sin. Jesus' sacrifice for us is the most profound example of love ever. We are still His creation and have worth, but not in the sense that we are counted equal with Jesus. If you truly believe that humanity is worthless, then how could you ever have any love or sympathy for those who don't believe? This gets to the heart of the line that "What joy could You see beyond the grave. If love found my soul worth dying for". Both of these lines are extremely important in understanding what the praise to God is here. It's not that we have no worth at all, nor is it that we are important enough to deserve God's love. It's that despite the fact that we rebel against Him every day, God still loves His creation so much so that He provided a way for us to be redeemed from what we deserve if we choose to accept it. I hope that as you take classes such as Old Testament, New Testament Literature, Theology 1, and Theology 2 (maybe more if you are a Bibl

I agree. Thank you for this.

Why is one song better than another? What should inform our singing? As Paul instructs, Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly, ... singing Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Col 3:16). This verse clearly teaches that the Word of God / the apostolic teaching should inform and govern (and censor, if need be) every song, both in its form/style, and, even more importantly, in its content. Every word spoken in the pulpit has to be judged to be according to the Word; but so does every word of every song (and everything else that goes on in public worship). Songs are teaching tools, as they are repeated and memorable – so, who is teaching us through them? Through their poetic form and artistry, songs also reach our emotions, so we should be doubly careful here, because there is a danger for our emotions to take over, and for our weakened minds to accept questionable teaching because we are caught up in the melody or in the moment. Songs for public worship should be thoroughly biblical and theologically sound, as should be every sermon (we worship not only through song, but also through the Word read and preached – which is the primary reason we come together as a church, through prayer, through giving, and through the ordinances/sacraments; and all should be informed and governed by the Scriptures). Some of the comments here are quite shallow, which reflects perhaps immaturity, or perhaps the spiritual „depth” of the songs at stake (makes one wonder if such writers actually read the article, looked at the song(s) that sparked this discussion, and got informed). Yet, it's not only that there are problematic or even heretical songs on Christian college campuses, but, as some of the comments attest, many songs display a tendency toward showmanship, emotional highs, and shallow theology. Then there is the issue of form - not every form/style is appropriate for worshiping the God the Bible reveals. Trying to build a big tent often comes with its drawbacks, and this is p

Seriously Cedarville. Use some discernment.

Great points, much needed

Jacob, please make sure you are seasoning your conversations with grace. Also, these are cults that do not teach about the true Jesus. You named an essential belief as "Jesus... Is their savior." These cults speak of a Jesus who asked them for forgiveness, and who was born again. This is not the same Jesus. You can not just put His name on it. Which Jesus do they need to believe in, as Mormons would also say that Jesus is their savior?

Also, Ethan did not claim that his paper is the Word of God. There is a face behind that screen so be careful with the keyboard warrior mentality. I hope we can all have a civil discussion regarding this important issue.

Yet we have played heresy in chapel multiplel times... Songs like Awesome God and Grace to Grace. Both of these have been played just in the last several weeks.

Elijah, I hope you are doing well. I just wanted to inform you, as someone who supports this petition, that the main issue is not the theology of the individual songs. It seems as though it is being interpreted that way, and that is not the only issue. However, Ethan is correct regarding the heresy in these songs. In refering to God, the song Awesome God, which is by Maverick City (strong Bethel association) says "So generous, so selfless," in refering to God. God is NOT selfless. He is definitely selfish, as He desires all of the glory. For Him to give His glory to men would be for Him to compromise His holiness. Just as our goal is to glorify God, His is to glorify Himself. He is the ultimate source of goodness, and in order to be good He must promote that goodness. In terms of Grace to Grace, that song is extremely heretical as well. It says, "If having my heart was worth the pain What joy could You see beyond the grave If love found my soul worth dying for." Basically, it imputes worth to the human heart and soul. Jesus did not come for our heart. Our heart was dirty and vile, and He came to change us. He did not come because our soul has value, He is glorified by loving us in spite of our worthlessness. We are dirty, and are of infinitely negative worth before a thrice holy God, yet He still predestined us to relationship with Him in spite of that. Wow! That is true love, not the meaningless supposed vision of value that this Hillsong music promotes. I hope this helps, and I hope you see that the point of this petition is actually more about the cults themselves leading people astray once people get into them. They are frequently brought in by the music, and then they go to a concert where there is some teaching and they become brainwahsed. It is sad, but all too common. Sure, Hillsong, Bethel, and Elevation have some non-heretical songs, but they still lead people to listen to more materials from these cults, potentially causing them

I agree with you that the songs we sing are not outright heretical. I am concerned though because I think a lot of them are pretty shallow, supporting the shallowness if nothing else of those churches (Bethel, Hillsong, Elevation etc). Thinking of the future, I'm afraid that allowing shallowness will get us used to it and open the doors to more shallowness and things worse down the line.

Your statement of heresy is correct.

You confuse lyrics of songs with doctrinal assertions. I agree that saying "Jesus didn't want heaven without us" in the context of a statement of faith would be heresy as this isn't present any where in Scripture. The context of the full stanza is important here. You didn't want heaven without us So Jesus, You brought heaven down My sin was great, Your love was greater What could separate us now In my opinion, in this context, the line calls attention to Jesus' love for us. So much that He wanted us to be apart of heaven. If you want to criticize something here, then criticize the sloppy wording of the artists. Again, if you are wanting better music in chapel to better reflect doctrines with precise assertions, that's fine. That doesn't mean that this song is heretical and singing this song in chapel is "taking part in the unfruitful works of darkness" because it's slightly imprecise. After examining the lyrics of the other two, I don't see in the lyrics of these songs where your claims are based. If you could cite those verses and provide me with the basis of your claims that would be great.

You confuse lyrics of song with doctrinal assertions. I agree that saying "The reason for the incarnation was because Jesus did not want heaven without us" in the context of a Statement of Faith would be heresy as this isn't present anywhere in Scripture. The context of the full stanza is important here. You didn't want heaven without us So Jesus, You brought heaven down My sin was great, Your love was greater What could separate us now? Jesus did bring the kingdom of heaven to us to be a part of. The first line is emphasizng Jesus' desire for us to be a part of His kingdom. This is made apparent by examining the inverse of the statement. Would Jesus want us to not be in heaven? A valid criticism of the song is at most at it is poorly written not heretical. Awesome God- God is selfless Examining the lyrics for myself, I do see where the claims for this are found. Please site the lyrics as I may have missed it or looked at an incorrect version of the song. Grace to Grace- Jesus died on the cross because we are worthy of his love I don't see the basis for this either. Upon examining the lyrics. Please cite the lyrics so that I can better understand where you get this from.

So I do not know who claimed that my paper was "the word of God," but it certainly is not. How did I take Jude out of context specifically? If you don't like Jude we can move on to the other 60 times false teachers are mentioned and they all stand in solidarity. They are to be marked and AVOIDED.