# What is the anatomy of a modern chorus?



## Eoghan (Sep 15, 2013)

I was reflecting on this and noticed that the modern choruses assert that God is for us/with us without qualification. My experience of the Psalms is that there is qualification. Why do modern choruses avoid qualifying phrases such as "the righteous" or "those who trust in the Lord". (I think we know the answer)

The other thing which Psalms do is provide an element of exhortation - thy word have I hid in my heart/ I meditate on thy laws. Choruses seem devoid of such reflections on spiritual life. Puritans I am sure would naturally draw on these "evidences of grace" as they approached worship, whether the Psalmists could view such signs of spiritual life as objectively I do not know.

If you have similar insights or would modify/extend my own please add to this thread. I know I don't like modern choruses but articulating why is I think an obligation.


----------



## JohnGill (Sep 15, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> I was reflecting on this and noticed that the modern choruses assert that God is for us/with us without qualification. My experience of the Psalms is that there is qualification. Why do modern choruses avoid qualifying phrases such as "the righteous" or "those who trust in the Lord". (I think we know the answer)
> 
> The other thing which Psalms do is provide an element of exhortation - thy word have I hid in my heart/ I meditate on thy laws. Choruses seem devoid of such reflections on spiritual life. Puritans I am sure would naturally draw on these "evidences of grace" as they approached worship, whether the Psalmists could view such signs of spiritual life as objectively I do not know.
> 
> If you have similar insights or would modify/extend my own please add to this thread. I know I don't like modern choruses but articulating why is I think an obligation.



I think a lot of it has to do with authorship. Are Biblically sound Christians writing these choruses? Or are people who claim to be Christians, but either are not or are theologically weak writing these choruses? I think at this time it is the latter and not the former. Of course, to remove the issue entirely one only needs to abide by exclusive psalmody.


----------



## iainduguid (Sep 15, 2013)

JohnGill said:


> Eoghan said:
> 
> 
> > I was reflecting on this and noticed that the modern choruses assert that God is for us/with us without qualification. My experience of the Psalms is that there is qualification. Why do modern choruses avoid qualifying phrases such as "the righteous" or "those who trust in the Lord". (I think we know the answer)
> ...


----------



## SinnerSavedByChrist (Sep 15, 2013)




----------



## Eoghan (Sep 16, 2013)

iainduguid said:


> JohnGill said:
> 
> 
> > Eoghan said:
> ...


----------



## JohnGill (Sep 16, 2013)

iainduguid said:


> *Surely the problem with such a sweeping condemnation is that there is no such thing as "the modern chorus". There are a diversity of different songs and new hymns that vary from trivial ditties to profound theological truth.
> *
> Please don't misunderstand me. I certainly wouldn't want to defend every modern song: there are bad Christian songs and hymns from every generation. But even if one holds to exclusive psalmody in public and family worship, must we say that there is no merit in any Christian song since...(fill in the date you prefer), even for private edification? Would it not be better to evaluate songs old and new on the basis of their theological content and their artistic merit? Certainly the kinds of questions you raise might be part of that evaluation (though I'm not sure all of the psalms would pass muster on those terms). *But the date of composition has little inherent impact on quality.*


*
I think the majority of what is being passed off as "new hymns" offer nothing more profound than repetitious drivel such as the all too familiar "Jesus is my girlfriend tra-la-la-la-la" song. I'm sure there are some songs being written today that are in line with such greats as "A Mighty Fortress is Our God", but the vast majority are not. Money, not theology, is the driving force today behind music, study Bibles, and theological literature in general. But again, we're talking about the overwhelming majority. The minority gives us such things as the translations into English of Turretin & Bavinck. And I suspect it gives us song writers who write theologically sound songs. *

*The date of composition has more than a little inherent impact on quality. Ours is a theologically weak age. And such an age taken in full has produced little of worth, theologically speaking, whether we're discussing songs, texts, fiction, etc. This is not to say the last 200 years have not produced anything of theological worth. We have been blessed with such godly men as Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, John Murray, J.C. Ryle, Robert Dabney, Dean John William Burgon, Dr. Edward Freer Hills, Frederick Scrivener, Ken Ham, R.C. Sproul, to name but a few. But none of these have been as popular in their teachings as have been the heretics such as: John N. Darby, Joseph Smith, Charles Finney, Brooke F. Westcott, F.J.A. Hort, Ellen G. White, Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, etc. An age held in thrall by the doctrines of such people will produce more that is worthless than worthwhile, in theological texts, songs, fiction (Left Behind), etc. *

Thankfully we are at the tipping point where what is considered "American Christianity" is about to be shivered to its core. 

Perhaps we should start a new thread where people can post links to various new songs that accurately reflect the OPs concern for theological soundness.


----------



## iainduguid (Sep 16, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> iainduguid said:
> 
> 
> > JohnGill said:
> ...


----------



## JP Wallace (Sep 16, 2013)

iainduguid said:


> And much of 19th/early 20th century hymnody is not very good either. That's why the person choosing the songs needs to be theologically discerning as well as musically aware, to sift through the dross and identify the profitable material.



Indeed, much of the modern stuff is vacuous, but some of older stuff particularly from late 19th/early 20th century is pernicious - terribly tainted by perfectionism for one thing, and often with a dose of accompanying mysticism.

Exhibit A
Perfect submission, perfect delight, 
visions of rapture now burst on my sight; 
angels descending bring from above 
echoes of mercy, whispers of love.


----------



## Jack K (Sep 16, 2013)

I suspect every age has had a preponderance of poor songs. One reason it seems like new ones written today are worse is because most of the older ones we still know are the cream of the crop from those older days. The poor ones are long forgotten.

That said, it does also seem like concern for robust theological content in Christian songs has been been taking a tumble since the late 1800s at least. Plenty of today's praise choruses frustrate me, for sure. I think the original accusation against all modern choruses was a tad too sweeping, but I can agree with much of the sentiment expressed.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 16, 2013)

The solution is to have only the Psalms of David at the stated worship services, thus imposing nothing on anyone. Liberty of conscience and individual taste aren't trampled upon, but left free. 
People can decide before God what they believe it appropriate to sing at other times, choosing between the dross and the quality material.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Free Christian (Sep 18, 2013)

I once went to a church that went from hymns to short chorus's. It was bad enough that they refused to sing Psalms, but when they even ditched the hymns for the chorus's, which often repeated the same line over and over and over, their spiral into fast food (that's what you meant Michael wasn't it?) type of services became obvious. No substance, no teaching, no warnings or exhortations, just la la chorus's full of sugar and bright colourings! Happy meals.


----------

