Stop playing Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation Music at Cedarville

So if planned parenthood put out a great theologically rich song you would sing it? If that is the only requirement lets sings some songs written by Mormons because some of those songs agree with our theology. Lets just let wolves into the church to do their work. Lets let them in to teach as well but first lets make sure they say only the things we agree with them on because it's fine to let wolves in just as long as they put on their sheep's skin first.

Grace to Grace- Jesus died on the cross because we are worthy of his love Awesome God- God is selfless What a Beautiful Name- The reason for the incarnation was because Jesus did not want heaven without us.

Most certainly, the God of the Bible.

Would you mind making me aware of which heretical doctrines the lyrics of these songs support?

Yes we do sing heretical songs "Grace to Grace" by Hillsong "Awesome God" "What a Beautiful Name"

Which one? The god that these cults serve or the God of the Bible?

I agree with you. I think that more songs containing scriptural truth should be present more often in chapel. The problem I have with this petition is the claim that Cedarville is theologically and financially supporting the ministry of the churches by playing the music in chapel. This is a grossly over-exaggerated claim. I haven't heard any songs in chapel that support the false theology of these churches in chapel, nor do I think Cedarville would allow that to happen. The royalties paid by CCLI that go directly to the ministry of these churches as a result of Cedarville playing the music in chapel is on the magnitude of cents or fractions of cents.

The songs we sing in chapel do not contain any of the heresies that the churches believe, nor do I think that Cedarville would allow them in chapel if that is the case. Also, CCLI (Christan Copyright Licensing International) is responsible for paying royalties to the artists, publishers (which is the direct connection to the churches, as I believe the churches act as the publishers for all the artists), and record labels. CCLI pays out royalties based on the number of songs played across all 250,000 churches and organizations they provide licenses to. Cedarville doesn't pay out any royalties. Cedarville has to pay for a license to use Christian songs by ALL artists not just Hillsong, Bethel, and Elevation in chapel and resound radio.

I fully agree with you. It's not fair at all to make generalizations about artists just based on the misguided theology of the churches. I also find the music impactful. Could we use more scriptural truth-centered music in chapel? I think so, but that does not mean that all other music should be judged as heretical and that Cedarville is supporting a heretical ministry through it.

I think that the songs we sing in chapel do reflect the God of the Bible. From my experience, I haven't heard any songs in chapel proclaiming the misguided theology of the churches. If you are a random person in Cedarville Chapel it is plain to see that the music is about the God of the Bible.

Criticizing the music based on it's content is the question here. What does the theology of the churches have to do with the properly vetted music we sing in chapel?

What a noble petition. Sad that it is even necessary. Who oversees the music there?

But is the song teaching those things? The answer is no. If the words line up with the Bible then it's acceptable in worship

Whether or not the lyrics are heretical, they aren't useful. Songs used for corporate worship should be held to a higher standard, even if you are fine listening to these songs on your own time. A random person should be able to look at the lyrics with no context and recognize that they are about the God of the Bible. I don't think that is true about many of the hillsong songs. Also, the meaning of the songs should have more significance than the emotion of the music. The emotion is okay as icing on the cake, but if the emotion is the only thing making anyone want to sing the song, then it's no good.

Please save our students from monotonous drivel and wicked theology.

Are the theological implications of music really our top priority or are we sacrificing that for music that brings about more of an emotional response. Not saying all our songs at chapel do that, but when we sing songs repetitively that don’t even mention scripture and instead focus on vague truths (many times written and produced by heretical churches) while there is so much good and rich music out there, we must at least question. Why are still we singing Hillsong, Bethel, and Elevation. There are thousands of songs/hymns to replace these with. Is it just more convenient to pick these songs? I don’t know but it’s something we should think about.

I have found that some of our current chapel songs have been lacking strong theological principles and instead focus on subjective feelings. Emotional language and music that deviates from sound doctrine leaves the audience with a strong feeling and little truth. There are many great worship songs that affirm biblical truth. Doesn’t it seem more beneficial to sing worship songs that portray more truth instead of chasing a feeling?

4 years ago Featured

I think it is very unfair generalization to label these groups and artists as cults and ALL of their songs heretical. Some songs from these groups are in fact God-centered and quite impactful, at least to me.

“…For at one time I seem to myself to give [the words] more honor than is seemly, feeling our minds to be more holily and fervently raised into a flame of devotion, by the holy words themselves when thus sang, than when not… But this contentment of the flesh, to which the soul must not be given over… doth oft beguile me, the sense not so waiting upon reason as patiently to follow her; but …striv[ing] even to run before her, and lead her. Thus in these things I unawares sin…” -Augustine, Confessions

Hello Ethan Tanner! Your paper is not the word of God. Your paper also did not answer any of my arguments. You used 2 verses as scriptural reference and they aren't used in correct context. Jude 7 says (talking about verses 3-4) "just as Sodom and Gamorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. Your verses mention sensuality. Verses need context in order for you to apply them to any sort of notion you may have. The question isn't about whether these churches are cults it's whether these songs say ANYTHING heretical and that would be the only reason we don't use them in chapel. I agree that these groups have some things that were definitely heretical, but that doesn't mean they all are.