Ok, more questions about worldliness. Pilgrim posted a link (
http://the-highway.com/articleOct09.html)to an article by Dr. Peter Masters who writes about a "new Calvinism" in which he describes a new movement amongst the reformed in doctrine who integrate "worldly" enticements.
The new Calvinism is not a resurgence but an entirely novel formula which strips the doctrine of its historic practice, and unites it with the world.
What,specifically, qualifies this movement to be worldly? I saw that he mentions:
music (ear splitting,thunderous,wordly, sensation stirring,high decible, rythmic, contemporary)
edgy language
gravely improper humour
preaching in a Jesus teeshirt
raised hands
Christian hip-hop and rap lyrics
replicated lighting and atmosphere
Do any one of these constitute worldliness? Or a combination of all? I think of rock or rap/hip-hop music as being worldly, and of course edgy language as well as improper humour. But what does lighting have to do with worldliness? Or raised hands? Or wearing a Jesus teeshirt? Is this judging by looking on the externals? The writer throws everything into the same lump and calls it all disobedience.
The present new, heady Calvinism, shorn of practical obedience will certainly prove to be ephemeral, leaving the cause compromised and scarred.
I also wondered about him saying this about some younger reformed pastors:
When you look at their ‘favourite films’, and ‘favourite music’ you find them unashamedly naming the leading groups, tracks and entertainment of debased culture, and it is clear that the world is still in their hearts. Years ago, such brethren would not have been baptised until they were clear of the world, but now you can go to seminary, no questions asked, and take up a pastorate, with unfought and unsurrendered idols in the throne room of your life. What hope is there for churches that have under-shepherds whose loyalties are so divided and distorted?
I don't know
which films and music these people listed in their blogs, but I wondered which ones would qualify them as being "worldly". I like the film Pride and Prejudice. Does that make me worldly and disobedient? I love to listen to Il Divo, Pavarati, Andre Boccelli, and other classically trained tenors, as well as some country/western music. Does that make me worldly?
Do you see that I am confused even further on this topic after reading this article? I also find it troubling that he seemed to be condemning pastors/teachers such as John MacArthur in this disobedience:
C J Mahaney is a preacher highly applauded in this book. Charismatic in belief and practice, he appears to be wholly accepted by the other big names who feature at the ‘new Calvinist’ conferences, such as John Piper, John MacArthur, Mark Dever, and Al Mohler.
He says the proponents of this movement have 4 viewpoints that are anti-Calvinistic/Puritanical:
Most of the well-known preachers who promote and encourage this ‘revival’ of Calvinism have in common the following positions that contradict a genuine Calvinistic (or Puritan) outlook:
1)They have no problem with contemporary charismatic-ethos worship, including extreme, heavy-metal forms.
2)They are soft on separation from worldliness [see endnote 2].
3)They reject the concern for the personal guidance of God in the major decisions of Christians (true sovereignty), thereby striking a death-blow to wholehearted consecration.
4)They hold anti-fourth-commandment views, taking a low view of the Lord’s Day, and so inflicting another blow at a consecrated lifestyle.
I've read/listened to many of MacArthur's sermons, including one on proper music, and I can say definitively that he does NOT view heavy-metal, extreme forms of music as being correct. He is very thorough and firm about music that violates scriptural principles. I would also have to say that he is as far from any sort of charasmatic doctrine as anyone I can think of. In listening to his sermons, one would never come away with the idea that he is soft on separation from worldliness! And to say that he rejects the concern for personal guidance of God in the major decisions of Christians is a very striking misreprentation of what he preaches. In fact, I cannot see how anyone could ever make that statement about him? As far as #4 goes, I do know that he believes the scriptures do not teach Sabbatarianism. I think I have posted here in another thread portions of what he's said about that. He is holding to his exegesis of certain scriptures regarding the subject, which is what we all should do. I know there is a matter of disagreement on this one, in particular, but that does not mean that one who does not hold to Sabbatarianism is not a concecrated Christian.
Masters also mentions a conference called "Resolved":
Resolved is the brainchild of a member of Dr John MacArthur’s pastoral staff, gathering thousands of young people annually, and featuring the usual mix of Calvinism and extreme charismatic-style worship. Young people are encouraged to feel the very same sensational nervous impact of loud rhythmic music on the body that they would experience in a large, worldly pop concert, complete with replicated lighting and atmosphere. At the same time they reflect on predestination and election. Worldly culture provides the bodily, emotional feelings, into which Christian thoughts are infused and floated. Biblical sentiments are harnessed to carnal entertainment. (Pictures of this conference on their website betray the totally worldly, show business atmosphere created by the organisers.)
What is meant by the term "charismatic-style worship". What exactly does that mean? I also looked at their website's pictures of their conference to see what it was that made them totally worldly and failed to feel justified in labeling them. Where are they contradicting scripture? Of course I did not hear the music, but the author of this article seems to say that the pictures alone are proof of guilt.
So.......wow, this is a long post! Sorry, but I'm trying to make the pieces fit and I just can't.
Does there seem to be some legalism involved in this big sweeping judgement? How is this different from the "externals" being used as a matter of judgmentalism executed by those in the Bob Jones sort of camp? It makes my head hurt.
Will I ever see clearly on this sort of thing?
Do I ask too many questions? Don't answer that one.
