# Worship At Saddleback



## Blueridge Believer (Jan 6, 2007)

I watched this. I really don't know what to say.

[video=google;1122526581190505259]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122526581190505259[/video]


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

I say it would be great if Rick and his Church actually believed half of the words in the chorus of that song. Sadly, due to the fruit of their Arminian theology, I don't think they do.


----------



## Casey (Jan 6, 2007)

Looks like how Brittany Spears would dance if she were on the stage.  Talk about "entertainment" invading the church . . .


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Jan 6, 2007)

Somehow brethren, when I think about the Son of God being whipped, beaten and nailed to a cross, I just don't feel like dancing.


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

Blueridge reformer said:


> Somehow brethren, when I think about the Son of God being whipped, beaten and nailed to a cross, I just don't feel like dancing.



What about when you think of the incredible grace and mercy of God on you and I, wretched sinners all?

What about when you think about the awesomeness of his sovereignty and how he still has the whole universe in his hands and is still in control?

Does anything about God and the Bible make you happy? It does for me.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Jan 6, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> What about when you think of the incredible grace and mercy of God on you and I, wretched sinners all?
> 
> What about when you think about the awesomeness of his sovereignty and how he still has the whole universe in his hands and is still in control?
> 
> Does anything about God and the Bible make you happy? It does for me.



Yes there are things that make me happy brother! But that display of a sex dance looked more like a bunch of jungle heathen. Is there anything out of bound these days?


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> Yes, I am all for a Godly happiness.
> 
> But a certain atmosphere must be cultivated in church - of soberness and seriousness.
> 
> ...



in my opinion, this is turning into a thread of man made regulations on how the Spirit is allowed to move in the heart of worship. I do, however, agree that what Saddleback is most likely doing is nothing more than entertainment designed to convince non-believers that Church is worldly and fun. I don't agree that it is inherently evil and innapropriate to dance in worship.


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

Blueridge reformer said:


> Yes there are things that make me happy brother! But that display of a sex dance looked more like a bunch of jungle heathen. Is there anything out of bound these days?



I watched the video several times. I find nothing sexual about it.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jan 6, 2007)

I dunno - but I was honored to have worshiped with my brothers and sisters in Uganda - they danced - and so did I - in the jungle. And it was awesome! Praise God!


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> Bandguy:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



100% agree with you here. I have, however, seen too many conversations that start with a blanket condemnation of a certain kind of music or dancing. Not the reasoning that went into it, but that it happened. I think sometimes, Reformed folk go too far the other way in response to the evil we see in the world and in many Churches today. The violent anti-Israel reaction, for example, to dispensationalism. Or, calling all dancing sinful and innappropiate in reaction to the market driven Saddlbacks of the world. Both extremes are, in my opinion, not of God and man made.


----------



## py3ak (Jan 6, 2007)

Haha, that was self-satirizing.


----------



## Romans922 (Jan 6, 2007)

Blueridge reformer said:


> Somehow brethren, when I think about the Son of God being whipped, beaten and nailed to a cross, I just don't feel like dancing.



What about when you think of the Son of God risen from the grave and ascending to sit at the right hand of God the Father.


----------



## Davidius (Jan 6, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> Truthfully, if this group wanted to dance and sing outside of church that would be great. Despite some "worldly" dance moves, they seemed fairly modestly dressed and the song was a good song. It is not heretical or blatantly immodest...it just doesn't fit worship. It is good entertainment - that's all.
> 
> It looked like a rock convert to me. I am glad for the enthusiasm and the joy of the song, but another time would be more appropriate - rather than in church.



Why doesn't it fit worship? How can you say that they weren't doing what they were doing with 'a sincere desire to honor God'? Of course, that's a rhetorical question. Since you can't say that with sureity, which standard are you using to say that what they were doing was inappropriate?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jan 6, 2007)

If this is meant to attract the world because it is "cool," then they must have targeting the lame, cheesy portion of the world. My eyes water during this refuse as a result of how dreadfully lame it is.


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

WrittenFromUtopia said:


> If this is meant to attract the world because it is "cool," then they must have targeting the lame, cheesy portion of the world. My eyes water during this refuse as a result of how dreadfully lame it is.



I agree that it is, in my opinion, lame. It does seem to, however, appeal to the teens in Orange County, California. I have always said that Californians were quite lame.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jan 6, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> I agree that it is, in my opinion, lame. It does seem to, however, appeal to the teens in Orange County, California. I have always said that Californians were quite lame.



Yeah, but these are the kind of teens that are looking to fit in and wear bright orange t-shirts a lot.


----------



## turmeric (Jan 6, 2007)

> > Originally Posted by Blueridge reformer
> > Somehow brethren, when I think about the Son of God being whipped, beaten and nailed to a cross, I just don't feel like dancing.
> 
> 
> ...



(My apologies in advance, Romans922, if this was not your intent.)

Can we stop insinuating that this guy doesn't love God, just because thoughts of Jesus' crucifixion cause him to be sober-minded? That's what they are supposed to do, to teach us to hate sin, among other things.

I've attended a Saddleback church, and I found the solos and the dancing to be highly inappropriate at times, and somewhat sexual, in imitation of secular pop videos.


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 6, 2007)

turmeric said:


> (My apologies in advance, Romans922, if this was not your intent.)
> 
> Can we stop insinuating that this guy doesn't love God, just because thoughts of Jesus' crucifixion cause him to be sober-minded? That's what they are supposed to do, to teach us to hate sin, among other things.
> 
> I've attended a Saddleback church, and I found the solos and the dancing to be highly inappropriate at times, and somewhat sexual, in imitation of secular pop videos.



Nobody intimated he didn't love God. We did intimate that he takes one aspect of the Bible, reacts to it appropriately, and then makes a man-made legalistic argument that this is the way all Christians should react when in Churches under all circumstances. We are not commanded to act as if we are constantly at a funeral for our Lord and Savior. There should also be joy at his ressurection, his sovereignty, and his grace and mercy.


----------



## Herald (Jan 7, 2007)

I really don't know where to start. Is Rick Warren the antichrist? No. Is Saddleback seeker sensitive and market driven? Yes. Paul wrote, *1 Corinthians 14:40* *40 But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner.* Where the regulative principle lacks this passage helps. I realize 1 Cor. 14 is governing the use of spiritual gifts, but worship brings the church before God. Is there time for solemn contemplation? Yes. Brokeness over sin? Certainly. Joy in the work of the risen Christ? Amen! Yes! Besides practicing correct theology we ought to practice godliness in our worship. W.C.F. and congregational churches will have different practices but they must be God-centric.


----------



## Davidius (Jan 7, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> I really don't know where to start. Is Rick Warren the antichrist? No. Is Saddleback seeker sensitive and market driven? Yes. Paul wrote, *1 Corinthians 14:40* *40 But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner.* Where the regulative principle lacks this passage helps. I realize 1 Cor. 14 is governing the use of spiritual gifts, but worship brings the church before God. Is there time for solemn contemplation? Yes. Brokeness over sin? Certainly. Joy in the work of the risen Christ? Amen! Yes! Besides practicing correct theology we ought to practice godliness in our worship. W.C.F. and congregational churches will have different practices but they must be God-centric.



It seemed pretty well-ordered to me. I mean, did you see that spot-on choreography?


----------



## Herald (Jan 7, 2007)

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> It seemed pretty well-ordered to me. I mean, did you see that spot-on choreography?



 Funny. Yeah, they had those moves down.


----------



## Richard King (Jan 7, 2007)

Geezer alert!
They used to have a word back in my day that described this stuff...it was the word "tacky"

That looked like it was choreographed by Corky St. Clair from Waiting for Guffman.


----------



## Davidius (Jan 7, 2007)

Richard King said:


> Geezer alert!
> 
> That looked like it was choreographed by Corky St. Clair from Waiting for Guffman.



Am I one of those for whom the Geezer alert was made if I have no idea what you're talking about in that last sentence?


----------



## Richard King (Jan 7, 2007)

Nah the geezer alert was refering to myself 
but apparently I am a very hip geezer. I give you...CORKY:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_Guffman


----------



## Davidius (Jan 7, 2007)

Richard King said:


> Nah the geezer alert was refering to myself
> but apparently I am a very hip geezer. I give you...CORKY:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_Guffman



ahhh thanks for clearing that up


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 7, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> Besides practicing correct theology we ought to practice godliness in our worship.



I would argue that the two are not mutually exclusive, but go hand in hand. Practicing Godliness in our worship begins with having correct theology.


----------



## Herald (Jan 7, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> I would argue that the two are not mutually exclusive, but go hand in hand. Practicing Godliness in our worship begins with having correct theology.



I actually meant the same thing. I wanted to make the math look like 1+1=1.


----------



## Romans922 (Jan 7, 2007)

turmeric said:


> (My apologies in advance, Romans922, if this was not your intent.)
> 
> Can we stop insinuating that this guy doesn't love God, just because thoughts of Jesus' crucifixion cause him to be sober-minded? That's what they are supposed to do, to teach us to hate sin, among other things.
> 
> I've attended a Saddleback church, and I found the solos and the dancing to be highly inappropriate at times, and somewhat sexual, in imitation of secular pop videos.



This is absolutely not my intent towards the person I was writing to above. I agree with His conclusion to the crucifixtion, but I think that the crucifixtion is something to be praised and cause joy in you, I also think that the resurrection and ascention should be something of a joy maker. After all it is the gospel, without which you cannot be saved. Let us be joyful that God has saved us and He has done it through His Son. 

Now does this mean we dance in church, no, I don't think so, but who says we can't do it by ourselves.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Jan 7, 2007)

I almost wish I hadn't posted this brethren. My intent was not to offend anyone, or to try to bind anyones conscience. I guess living kind of isolated in the Blueridge Mnts. cuts you off from the "cutting edge" so to speak. My biggest concern with this kind of music in the church is personal. If you take away the lyrics, it sounds just like something you here in a bar or dance hall.
And dance they did. To me it seems like the worlds methods and music are being brought into worship and it seems, in my opinion, to make the Gospel of Christ a trivial thing. To me, it looked lewd and there seemed to be no fear of God in it. Please excuse my narrow mindedness, but for me I still like it the old time way.
God bless you all this Lord's Day.


----------



## AV1611 (Jan 7, 2007)

Well I managed 5 seconds of it....speechless with shock!


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 7, 2007)

Blueridge reformer said:


> I almost wish I hadn't posted this brethren. My intent was not to offend anyone, or to try to bind anyones conscience. I guess living kind of isolated in the Blueridge Mnts. cuts you off from the "cutting edge" so to speak. My biggest concern with this kind of music in the church is personal. If you take away the lyrics, it sounds just like something you here in a bar or dance hall.
> And dance they did. To me it seems like the worlds methods and music are being brought into worship and it seems, in my opinion, to make the Gospel of Christ a trivial thing. To me, it looked lewd and there seemed to be no fear of God in it. Please excuse my narrow mindedness, but for me I still like it the old time way.
> God bless you all this Lord's Day.



I agree that the reasoning behind it is sinful and based on false Arminian theology, but the act itself is not necessarily wrong. For the record, I also like the old time hymns. But more important to me is how God chooses to act...and sometimes it is not how I would have done it or what makes me comfortable.


----------



## alwaysreforming (Jan 7, 2007)

That's not worship. If that's worship, I would really like to hear an argument about what's NOT worship! 

So, when these people stand before the throne of God, do they really have the audacity to think they'd get away with doing a repeat performance of that "worship" service?  Is anyone in Heaven dancing like that? I bet not.

We've got way too many people "on stage" these days at church. Everybody wants their turn in the spotlight. 
Shouldn't anybody held before the congregation to "lead" them in worship be an example to the flock themselves. It looks like all you need to do to lead the congregation is to have good dance moves. I bet you could even be a non-believer and still be allowed to be up their with them.
"Can Jonny dance with us on Sunday?" 
"Sure, besides, him rubbing elbows with the rest of the dance team will be a good witness to him."

This is all rubbish and will be burned away by the all-consuming fire of the Almighty. (in my humble opinion)


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jan 7, 2007)

Looked more like some high school talent show or somthing to me.

Personally I'd find all the lights, sounds and "party time" atmoshphere a bit distracting. 

Not to mention what the kids were performing looks merely like a "cleaned up" version of somthing they might have seen in any MTV R&B video.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jan 7, 2007)

MrMerlin777 said:


> Looked more like some high school talent show or somthing to me.
> 
> Personally I'd find all the lights, sounds and "party time" atmoshphere a bit distracting.
> 
> Not to mention what the kids were performing looks merely like a "cleaned up" version of somthing they might have seen in any MTV R&B video.



It reminded me of a high school danceline routine.


----------



## Greg (Jan 7, 2007)

StaunchPresbyterian said:


> Looks like how Brittany Spears would dance if she were on the stage.  Talk about "entertainment" invading the church . . .


----------



## calgal (Jan 7, 2007)

It does look like a dance recital which is fine when showcasing the talent of the kids dancing. in my opinion the focus is on the entertainment and not so much on God.  It is typical megachurch theatrics: lots of praise songs and dramas then a sermon.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jan 7, 2007)

hmmm, Moses came down and Aaron told him "well, we were just worshipping God...thought he'd be pleased with our song and dance"....

BTW, this reminded me of the SBC we were in as teens. In fact, it reminds me of my in-laws SBC.

And yes, the moves used are sexual and are meant as sexual when danced to any kind of music with different lyrics. Changing the lyrics and tune doesn't make them any less so. Janet Jackson and Madonna from my highschool MTV watching days.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jan 7, 2007)

Try watching it with the volume turned off.


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 7, 2007)

LadyFlynt said:


> And yes, the moves used are sexual and are meant as sexual when danced to any kind of music with different lyrics. Changing the lyrics and tune doesn't make them any less so. Janet Jackson and Madonna from my highschool MTV watching days.



I disagree.


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Jan 7, 2007)

What is the purpose of the dancing? Is it a spontaneous reaction to the preaching of the good news of the gospel? No. It is choreographed, and premeditated. Is it designed to present a specific message to the church? No. It is pure entertainment.

It is there to look good. Sexual or no, this has no place in a church. 

Really, when push comes to shove, all this can be attributed to is the worship of man. I look good, I can do all this stuff with my body, watch me go.



PS. For those claiming that the dance itself is not a sexual or overly sensual thing, do you see or would you expect to see an overweight or disabled person up there dancing away?


----------



## Bandguy (Jan 7, 2007)

Exagorazo said:


> What is the purpose of the dancing? Is it a spontaneous reaction to the preaching of the good news of the gospel? No. It is choreographed, and premeditated. Is it designed to present a specific message to the church? No. It is pure entertainment.
> 
> It is there to look good. Sexual or no, this has no place in a church.
> 
> ...



1. You are right that this is most likely for entertainment. 

2. No I would not expect to see an overweight or disabled person up there dancing away any more than I would expect to see them playing basketball in the NBA, doing the long jump in the olympics, competeing in kick-boxing or MMA, or any number of physical activities. It has everything to do with what they can or cannot do physically and nothing to do with their sexuality.


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Jan 7, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> 1. You are right that this is most likely for entertainment.
> 
> 
> 2. No I would not expect to see an overweight or disabled person up there dancing away any more than I would expect to see them playing basketball in the NBA, doing the long jump in the olympics, competeing in kick-boxing or MMA, or any number of physical activities. It has everything to do with what they can or cannot do physically and nothing to do with their sexuality.


OK, maybe my example was a bit too extreme. How about this: Would you expect to see a conventionally ugly person up there? If this is, as you say, for entertainment, then it has to look good. Remember, I said sexual _or_ sensual. Sensual doesn't mean sexual, it means aimed at the senses. It is there to look good, therefore it has no place in church.


----------



## DaveJes1979 (Jan 7, 2007)

Truly horrendous to watch. 

Although, the bass player is sweeeeet!


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 8, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> 1. You are right that this is most likely for entertainment.
> 
> 2. No I would not expect to see an overweight or disabled person up there dancing away any more than I would expect to see them playing basketball in the NBA, doing the long jump in the olympics, competeing in kick-boxing or MMA, or any number of physical activities. It has everything to do with what they can or cannot do physically and nothing to do with their sexuality.



Sexual or not, (and I find it hard to fathom anyone seeing the same pelvis-thrusting moves that I did on that video -even as 'restrained' as the example shown in the video was, it was still of that kind of dancing - as anything but sexually suggestive) this kind of idiotic performance has ABSOLUTELY NO PLACE in any "ceremony" claiming to be God-honoring worship. This was nothing but a nightclub act, and should be utterly abhorrent to anyone who has any inkling of a concern for proper, Biblical worship. It was a performance, pure and simple, regardless of its merits or demerits otherwise.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jan 8, 2007)

Bandguy said:


> I disagree.


Disagreeing doesn't change the facts. Not all, but enough of the movements were sensual (thank you to the person who split the terms sensual/sexual...sensual is a better term). I used to watch cheerleading and ice skating competitions. Yes, it is about what a body can do...but one has to admit that a goodly portion of the moves are INTENTIONALLY sensual. This is what attracts, it is what stretches the performance beyond the "boring norm", and gets them points (most of the time...thankfully there are those that have learned to win based on other merits alone). Some of these moves are present in the video.

And I agree, the rest of the aspects are a complete distraction. The focus is "look what we can do" rather than "Let's worship the Lord".


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jan 8, 2007)

toddpedlar said:


> Sexual or not, (and I find it hard to fathom anyone seeing the same pelvis-thrusting moves that I did on that video -even as 'restrained' as the example shown in the video was, it was still of that kind of dancing - as anything but sexually suggestive) this kind of idiotic performance has ABSOLUTELY NO PLACE in any "ceremony" claiming to be God-honoring worship. This was nothing but a nightclub act, and should be utterly abhorrent to anyone who has any inkling of a concern for proper, Biblical worship. It was a performance, pure and simple, regardless of its merits or demerits otherwise.



I initially thought the criticism was about the hand movements by the kids or the swaying/clapping by the choir, both things I don't really have any issue with in the context of praise worship liberty...but then the choreographed dancing started and it was very obvious that this was more about personal talent displays and glorification that moved toward the licentious end of the spectrum, than focus on glorifying God - even with a charitable mindset, which I am prone to have, this was too much. 

I would like to see the worship leader's systematic for allowing this type of dance or the Sr. Pastor's for allowing it. 

Salsa and tango is not about worshipping God.

( ***sigh*** - ah, Rick - you are really letting me down...thank God for John Piper!  )


----------



## Blue Tick (Jan 8, 2007)

toddpedlar said:


> Sexual or not, (and I find it hard to fathom anyone seeing the same pelvis-thrusting moves that I did on that video -even as 'restrained' as the example shown in the video was, it was still of that kind of dancing - as anything but sexually suggestive) this kind of idiotic performance has ABSOLUTELY NO PLACE in any "ceremony" claiming to be God-honoring worship. This was nothing but a nightclub act, and should be utterly abhorrent to anyone who has any inkling of a concern for proper, Biblical worship. It was a performance, pure and simple, regardless of its merits or demerits otherwise.



Can I buy you a drink?


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jan 8, 2007)

I wonder what Rich Mullins would think if he knew that the song he wrote had been butchered in such a fasion as this. They didn't even use the original lyrics, just the chorus. And (not that he is all that important) the kind of guy he was I really wonder if he'd have approved of his art being used in that fasion?

I know theologically he wasn't exactly the best but I love his music, and the original song Awsome God truly made you muse upon our Awesome God. And when he played live he did what he could to not draw attention to himself but point to God.

He does have even better songs though. Frankly I prefer his stuff like The Colour Green, very worshipful.


----------



## non dignus (Jan 8, 2007)

If a church leader thinks it's a good idea for boys to watch girls dance in church to a very stimulating style of music most often used with erotic lyics, I'd ask for his resignation.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 8, 2007)

thaT video clip is disgusting. That looks like a mixture of a rock concert and a regular "getting jiggy with it" night club. And the music that goes along with the song is also worldly and wreaks of the flesh. I could see Backstreet Boys, N Sync and Justin Timberlake singing to it. Saddleback needs to clean up their act. 

Even the very words of the song militates against that delusion that is going on. "Our God is an Awesome God". For that to be set to music, the music has to be majestic.* MAESTOSO ALLARGANDO* not *Scherzo Capriccio*


----------



## SRoper (Jan 8, 2007)

Slippery said:


> Even the very words of the song militates against that delusion that is going on. "Our God is an Awesome God". For that to be set to music, the music has to be majestic.



Maybe their understanding of "awesome" does not exceed the '80s slang use of the word.


----------



## Blue Tick (Jan 8, 2007)

It's a PeP Rally! Ya,Ya, Ya,


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jan 8, 2007)

SRoper said:


> Maybe their understanding of "awesome" does not exceed the '80s slang use of the word.



This is a distinct possibility.


----------



## non dignus (Jan 8, 2007)

Viewing the clip again, I noticed once the dancing started I completely lost track of the message in the words because of an admittedly good choreography.

My wife was reminded of the golden calf incident in Exodus. 

I can see why the Saddleback formula is so popular. 
One may see _that it is a delight to the eyes, and to be desired to make one wise....."_


----------



## shelly (Apr 16, 2007)

It definitly wasn't putting the focus on God and the lyrics were lame and the music was awful. Not that I mind a beat or anything. I mean it sounded awful. It's something I'd expect to hear coming out of some kid's garage band. 

I do love Rich Mullins, but they butchered the song I have to go turn some good music on to "wash the taste out" of my mind.

Ahhh... that's better Songs for the Cross Centered Life -- good doctrine and a beat.

shelly


----------



## kvanlaan (Apr 16, 2007)

Does anyone have the clip anywhere other than Google? I can't access it and though I don't like the sounds of it, I find it hard to say anything about it without actually viewing the video. 

That being said, if it is of an inappropriate nature, maybe I don't need to see it at all. (I never thought I'd say that about something that happened in a church!)


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 16, 2007)

I thought it was very entertaining. 
It was a great show. 
It made me want to move.
Made me want to get down.
Gonna let down my hair and shake my hips like I just don't care. 
We're gonna paaaaaaar-ty! Boom-shakka-lakka!


----------



## etexas (Apr 16, 2007)

Pretty horrid.


----------



## staythecourse (Apr 16, 2007)

*Age and Christian Maturity*

A few thoughts on this video clip.

The first would be what several of you brought up. It was as if a poor-man's Brittany Spear's little sister just became a Christian and wanted to show off for the whole world she were a new believer. The question that begs to be answered would be: "Is she really converted or just shallow soil? Let's wait and see. This foolishness may pass." Whoever taught her to respond that way had better bring her thoughts of worship aright fast and firmly as "she knows not what she does."

This is also an example in my eyes of how Christian rock and now worship is about 10 years behind the secular world in being hip. May Christianity be forever un-hip. This clip reminded me of a poor example of collegiate cheerleeding competitions and American Idol combined. It smacks of "look-at-me" worship rather than "Behold Christ." 

I have (by God's grace) moved from this type of worship in the SBC to sober-minded worship with old/ancient hymns and their simple yet deepy profound words. Can you imagine the apostles and their wives getting-down in worship like this? God-forbid.

Since the option to worship like this has been around for millenia and has not been advocated by the greats (but rather smells more like Herod's wife's daughter dancing before him) let's keep our hips in place when we worship and worship God from our heart, mind and mouth. Stick to the ancient paths and God will be pleased and you will be blessed.

As for other cultures and their dance: missionaries of the past worked long and hard to irradicate pagan rituals from even new believers' mindsets. These dances are most likely a carry over from old sinful lifestyles.

All in all, as we get moe mature in Christ, we will become more uncomfotable with this style of fleshly non-worship, and long for worshipping in a quiet spiritual way even as a group.


----------



## tfelice (Apr 25, 2007)

The funny thing is that while Warren creates this stuff supposedly to appeal to unbelievers. However, I have heard from many non-Christian people that have visited seeker-type churches that they were offended by the rock concert atmosphere and thought that they were making a mockery out of church. 

There is a church in the Philly burbs that met in a movie theatre when they were starting up. Doing so they took on the nickname of "Movie Church". What is really bizarre though is that when they finally were able to construct their own building, they designed it to look like a movie theater. There is even a "ticket booth" in front of the church building. From the road it doesn't look like a church building by any stretch of the imagination. My father-in-law (who darkens the door of a church only for weddings & funerals) looks at it as if it is some sort of joke. So much for reaching the lost. 

In my opinion, the seeker movement does little to reach the lost, but is simply creating a church for people who think they are Christian, desire to go to church, but want to be entertained and home in an hour.


----------

