Music is important to most Christians. However, most Christians spend very little time thinking about why music matters to the church. To most, corporate worship is just something that’s always done, and all that really matters is that the music somehow talks about God.
However, as we’ll see in this article, there’s far more to what a song teaches than just the lyrics. Pastors and music leaders, especially, have a great burden placed upon them. James 3:1 reminds us that teachers will be judged more strictly by God, which means they need to take the music of their church more seriously than anyone else.
The first article of this series examined the perspective of those who use music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation. Likewise, as the title suggests, this article is written from the perspective of those who believe music from these churches isn’t just a matter of preference, but should be completely rejected. The goal in representing both sides is to create a serious discussion that represents the deep-seated beliefs of real people rather than poorly representing one side to make another look stronger. In the end, I desire to fully equip readers to understand why this debate is about more than just music, and why they believe what they believe about the debate.
This article will look at many of the dangers involved in using music from these churches. As I said in my first article, I assume that the readers would wholeheartedly disagree with many things taught in these churches if they knew about it. My next articles will dig into those teachings. However, if you aren’t sure why these churches might be problematic, these links can provide a basic overview until my own articles are available:
Bethel: Bethel’s False Gospel and Other Issues (Exploring the Worship Music Debate #3) (This is the next article in this series)
Hillsong: Is Hillsong a biblically solid church? (Got Questions)
Elevation: Concerns About Elevation Church (Baptist 21) and The False Teaching of Steven Furtick (God Words)
Table of Contents
- The broad issues with using music from Bethel, Hillsong, or Elevation
- We promote heresy to weaker Christians
- We financially support false teaching
- We engage in a poor theology of worship
- We participate in manufactured religious experiences
- We justify it pragmatically
- We reduce serious issues to preferences and secondary issues
- We prevent pastors from obeying New Testament warnings
- Final thoughts
The broad issues with using music from Bethel, Hillsong, or Elevation
For those who know the doctrinal issues with these churches, we must consider why it may not be a simple matter of taking the good while rejecting the bad.
We promote heresy to weaker Christians
Section summary: These churches don’t teach a true gospel. Their music is one of many pipelines designed to direct people back to the main teachings of their church. By bringing false teachers into our church, we tell weaker Christians that these churches are safe.
A pastor can listen to a biblically-sound song without seeking out the church that sent the musicians. Spiritually mature and discerning Christians who seek out other ministries from these churches will immediately reject them. Likewise, there is little chance they will be confronted with the theology of these churches and add it to their own beliefs. For some, the unbiblical teachings of the churches have little chance to deceive them.
However, that’s not true of most Christians. The reality is that we live in a biblically illiterate and doctrinally immature Christian culture. Many Christians struggle to identify whether teaching is weak, let alone heretical. For many, if something sounds good and somewhat biblical, they accept it into their worldview. By using music from these churches, we may tell weaker Christians that their spiritual leaders have vetted the group and approved of them.
That may seem unfair, but that’s one of many burdens placed on church leaders. When they integrate a church’s worship music into their own worship time, Christians in the audience assume these groups are trustworthy. They rely on their leaders to protect them and are thus less guarded when seeking out other things attached to these ministries.
In no uncertain terms, we cannot ignore that singing music from heretical churches like Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation promote those churches to weaker Christians. We not only allow people to be deceived, but we encourage them to seek these churches out. There’s a logical progression to enjoying one song and seeking out more, then wanting to learn more about the churches that a particular group represents. Likewise, if a friend shares a quote, sermon, or book from one of these churches, someone will naturally conclude “Oh, we sing their songs at church!” and give more heed to whatever teaching they encounter.
And this is by design. These groups exist to further the spread of a particular church’s doctrine. When we promote them, we actively participate in their outreach.
To see this in action, visit the website of any of the groups. This is the main hub people will visit to learn more about these music groups, and all of them direct people to the church, and the church’s teachings, that they represent.
- BethelMusic.com directs people to various Bethel ministries under their “more” section at the bottom of every page.
- Hillsong.com/Music is just a subsection of the church’s main website.
- ElevationWorship.com has an About page that does not separate the musical group, Elevation Church, and Steven Furtick. To quote this page, “Furtick—who has become a renowned pastor, speaker, and author—remains the visionary behind Elevation Worship…”
Christians must think clearly about the purpose of these music ministries. None of them are independent entities. All of them are branches of their respective churches. Things like a church’s children’s ministry, adult groups, books, community outreach opportunities, and worship groups are pipelines designed to bring people back to the church’s center: its teachings about the Bible and Jesus Christ. If we wouldn’t be comfortable telling people to go directly to the church itself, why would we direct people to one of the tools the church uses to reach the world with its doctrine?
Bethel Music, Hillsong Worship, and Elevation Worship don’t exist to make music in isolation. They are branches of their respective churches. And by singing them in our churches, we can set people on a path intentionally designed to direct them to other areas of their church. And because the music is so enjoyable, and especially because it’s integrated into a person’s home church, they will naturally assume that other things made by the church are equally valuable and true.
We financially support false teaching
Section summary: Legally using their music requires churches to take part in these groups receiving royalties or boosting their numbers and helping them reach the top of various charts. If a church wouldn’t send money directly to Bethel, Hillsong, or Elevation, they shouldn’t directly support them through other means.
A church would raise all kinds of red flags if they wrote a monthly check to a false teacher like Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland. Most churches would even find it unthinkable to write a check directly to Bethel Church itself, knowing that many of the things they teach are dangerously unbiblical. A church, like all individuals, must be a good steward of the resources God gives them. To use those resources to support a church that clearly and boldly proclaims unbiblical teaching would demand that the church be foolish and bad stewards of their money, as well as poor defenders of the faith.
However, churches do this when they use music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation. To use their music legally, as a church should, they must either directly or indirectly pay royalties to that particular group. Although there are some legal protections for using the music for free during the worship service, most churches use CCLI, a service that turns subscriptions into royalties for the various artists a church uses. These services also require churches to report which songs they’ve used, and this data will go on to boost the value of those artists.
Not only that, but many people who hear a catchy or emotionally-driving song are likely to stream it on their own devices or buy the song directly. A church that features a song once is likely to contribute to that song being consumed many times over the next few months by people in the congregation. So even if a church isn’t paying for the song themselves, they still contribute to these churches receiving royalties.
For example, Bethel Music reported over $11,000,000 in revenue in 2020. Over $6,000,000 of that came from royalties alone. Whether they mean to or not, theologically-sound churches are contributing to the wild success of Bethel and churches like them.
True, a church is unlikely to agree with absolutely every doctrine of any musical artist. However, the issue isn’t giving financial support to someone with a different interpretation of Revelation or even whether supernatural gifts are still active today. If a leader knows these churches promote false teaching, then to financially support them through music royalties, or to promote them knowing that their members will seek them out, is to financially support false teachers.
We engage in a poor theology of worship
Section summary: These churches have a Pentecostal definition of worship, which is reflected in their songwriting. They emphasize the emotions and experience of worship, believing it literally manifests God’s presence around us.
One issue with many weak or false teachings throughout Christianity is the problem of definitions. Conversations often get confused because several groups are using the exact same words, yet may not realize they define them very differently. So when groups like Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation talk about worship, they define it through a very different theological lens based on a very different biblical interpretation of worship. And when we use and promote their music, we let them define what worship means in the life of Christ’s followers.
These churches may have their own practices, but they all follow a Pentecostal interpretation of worship. Within Pentecostalism, the goal of worship is to let people experience God’s presence. To quote Darlene Zschech, a former Hillsong music leader:
Our praise is irresistible to God. As soon as He hears us call His name, He is ready to answer us. That is the God we serve. Every time the praise and worship team with our musicians, singers, production teams, dancers, and actors begin to praise God, His presence comes in like a flood. Even though we live in His presence, His love is lavished on us in a miraculous way when we praise Him.
Dr. Daniel Albrecht studied Pentecostalism and made this observation:
For some contemporary Pentecostals congregants, “worship” is another way of saying “presence of God.” “Worship” functions as a code term. For many, it refers to the encounter with the divine as mediated by a sense of the divine presence or power. Pentecostals believe strongly in the manifest presence of God. Their experience of the holy presence shapes them spiritually. In the liturgy the heightened awareness of this presence occurs often within the dimension they refer to as worship.
Pentecostals practice worship as both the experiencing (the immediate presence) of God and as the “techniques,” iconic ways into the presence of God. Forms of musical expressions, including powerfully suggestive symbolic worship choruses and verbal and kinesthetic praise practices serve to “trigger” a sense of close presence, a hierophany. Within the milieu of hierophany, the Pentecostals encounter and experience the divine. The rites then function both as experiences themselves and as icons into particular forms of experience (e.g., hierophany).”
Bethel’s own “Beliefs on Worship” page clearly states their definition of worship: “It’s all about His presence.” Their worship music is designed to bring on this presence. But what is God’s presence in the eyes of Bethel Church and Pentecostalism as a whole?
Bill Johnson often equates God’s presence with His voice, and we can recognize them in the same way. When you don’t hear God audibly, but you think you feel God, that’s His voice and presence. To be very clear, Bethel believes that if worship produces an emotional response, it’s evidence of God’s presence. In addition to that, if God presently speaks to someone, it’s through a feeling or experience rather than a literal series of sentences as He spoke to prophets in the Bible (See Bill Johnson’s comment at the 12:25 mark here).
The exact meaning of “God’s presence” is rarely defined, likely because they believe Christianity is meant to be a mystical experience, and thus the opposite of concrete definitions. However, in addition to leading people in their feelings, worship is also meant to bring on God’s presence by overflowing the Holy Spirit inside of us. That’s because God manifests His presence through the supernatural, just as He did when leading the Israelites through a pillar of fire. This often leads to worship involving things like prophecy, speaking in tongues, and other spontaneous expressions of the Holy Spirit.
Examine and analyze their music yourself, and especially their own church’s worship services. Consider the purpose of the repetitive lyrics, swelling instrumentals, and words of empowerment. When we realize that the end goal of their music philosophy is to generate emotion and experience, we also realize that even otherwise “safe” songs are crafted in alignment with what these groups want to teach about worship.
This interpretation of worship runs through all these groups. Elevation, like the rest, sings about God’s presence. When we interpret these songs through a Pentecostal understanding of worship, singing about things like “God’s presence” takes on entirely different meanings. To them, God’s presence is manifested during singing, sometimes physically through things like clouds of gold dust, but often through how the singing makes the audience feel.
The Pentecostal understanding of worship also explains the common criticism of modern worship music being self-focused. Many of the most popular songs use the pronouns “I, me, my,” singing from an individual perspective rather than encouraging congregational singing to God. But this makes sense when we realize that they write these songs according to their theology. Because they believe worship is meant to generate an emotion-driven experience for individuals, self-focused lyrics are a natural outflow of that.
Worship in a Pentecostal interpretation isn’t driven by the truth of the words. Instead, words are a vehicle that takes us to what worship is really about. This is why so many of the songs are simple, repetitive, and may feature as many wordless instrumentals as they do singing. It’s all meant to carry an individual to an emotional experience that should be interpreted as God’s presence.
Many churches that sing these songs probably don’t agree with the Pentecostal understanding of worship. It’s also likely that many don’t even realize that these groups define words like “worship” differently. However, this is what we invite into our churches when we sing them. These beliefs are core to everything these groups create. By promoting them, we can allow these groups to teach God’s people that worship is primarily driven by emotion and that God is encountered in experiences.
We participate in manufactured religious experiences
Section summary: Worship participants are conditioned to associate emotional experiences with the presence of God. However, these emotional experiences are psychological manipulations used by various religions and cults throughout history. This has created a history of emotional experiences that have defined many people’s Christian lives.
Because these churches view worship as an emotional experience, they craft their music to reach that goal. However, it may not be immediately evident how the choice of music, lyrics, and repeated choruses have a psychological effect on the participants. Many use and promote music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation because it makes people feel closer to God. However, as we will soon discuss, many may simply experience emotional manipulation that they’re taught to equate with God’s presence, even though God isn’t necessary for those feelings.
Mindlessness
Note the words of Bethel’s worship leader at around the 17:30 mark of this video. In line with their theology of worship, she says:
“Your mind doesn’t even have to understand what’s happening, it doesn’t matter. Just let your spirit receive, fully, what God’s doing through the sound in this moment.”
This sounds very pious and spiritual. However, it’s also critical to generate the emotional experience their music seeks to manufacture. The audience is being told to abandon their reason, logic, and critical thinking, and replace them with the emotional experience generated through artistically-crafted music. By doing so, the audience’s mindlessness allows them to simply feel, and in feeling positive emotions they will be influenced by their conditioning to believe that God is present.
Nowhere in God’s word are we told to abandon our minds for the sake of our emotions. In Matthew 22:37, Jesus told His followers to love God with their minds. Those who confuse faith with mindless emotionalism fail to realize that Hebrews 11:1 tells us that faith comes from using our reason (see my series on how the Bible defines faith here). Proverbs, Acts 17:11, 1 John 4:1, and many other areas of God’s word remind us to test, evaluate, and practice discernment. These things are not only ignored but subtly discouraged by groups like Bethel.
There is great danger in turning off our minds and being swept up in music and chanting. If understanding the truth of God isn’t necessary during worship, then the sad reality is that God Himself isn’t necessary for this worship. The Lord’s name is simply a participant used to deliver people into an emotional trance where their minds are turned off, their discernment is discouraged, and they are left to simply feel the moment.
As we reflect on the theology of worship in groups like Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation, this mindlessness makes sense. When worship is about how we feel, not what we know, then the mind becomes the enemy. It’s necessary to be dominated by the music, otherwise, we may further analyze the science behind their music. In this mindlessness, listeners become more open to suggestions and thus accept that what they feel is God.
Music and brain chemistry
Scientists and psychologists are well aware of music’s power to put people into an “altered state of consciousness.” Music so powerfully affects the mind that it can be used similarly to mind-altering drugs, creating abnormal thinking patterns and even altering a person’s sense of reality. Working in tandem with a call to mindlessness, music can have a near-hypnotic effect on listeners who are open to it.
Likewise, medical experts have also investigated the biological effects of music on the brain, even creating an entire branch of treatment called music therapy. Psychologists have found great success in using music as a more natural way to treat mood disorders such as anxiety and depression. There is even an ongoing debate where some believe religious people are conditioned to respond to religious music, while others show that things like flow, rhythm, volume, and music styles can trigger similar feelings in non-religious people.
Here’s the point: there’s overwhelming evidence outside of Christianity that explains why these particular songs, played and sung in particular ways, using particular lyrics, have such a particular effect. Even atheists can show that playing certain styles of music will trigger a dopamine effect, giving a near-indistinguishable feeling that people say they experience when they feel God’s presence during worship. Even Christians acknowledge the role of brain chemistry in these experiences.
Don’t misunderstand, it’s not wrong or ungodly to feel something during worship. Remember that the Psalms are filled with emotional responses to the truth of God. The problem we see with these musical groups is that emotion isn’t a byproduct of truth-filled worship, but the goal. They manufacture biological responses in the audience and condition people to believe they are having a divine encounter with God.
Simple song lyrics
The popularity of these groups shouldn’t be surprising. Songwriting is an art, but creating popular music is a science. We can look outside of our Christian circles to see that it’s not just worship music seeing a rising popularity of simplified song lyrics, but rather that these groups reflect a cultural shift towards music that is easier to understand immediately and memorize in moments.
The ultimate factor that seems to drive the popularity of modern music is called “compressibility.” This is a measure of a song’s lyrical simplicity or complexity. The more compressible something is, the better a listener is able to fully take in a song without being bored or overwhelmed. The desire for simplicity isn’t exclusive to music and is desired in nearly every area of our culture.
That’s not to say that we want things too simple. After all, there’s a reason Christian radio stations regularly play Hillsong and not “Jesus Loves the Little Children.” One researcher found that there is an ideal middle ground between music that is too complex and too trivial. We want to do some level of thinking, but not enough that we may feel like we aren’t clever (or spiritual) enough to understand the song.
One study examined lyrical complexity over the past 60 years and easily concluded that song lyrics have become increasingly simple across the board. And even within the discussion of worship music, we can appreciate why simple lyrics are popular. Ultimately, it comes down to too many choices. With hundreds of new worship songs to choose from over the last decade, the average worship song only lasts a few years in a church’s rotation before being replaced with newer songs.
Thus, simpler song lyrics are a matter of survival. If you release a song that is lyrically complex and put it up against one that is simpler, a song of deeper theological truth that requires a singer to chew on the lyrics is far less appealing than one that can be understood immediately. There may very well be songs with lyrical complexity and theological depth released today, but we rarely hear them because they struggle to be heard over the hundreds of other songs fighting for our ears.
The science is interesting, but why does this matter to our discussion? Because many churches and individuals who like music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation don’t agree with their theology, yet still play their music because they like it personally, or because many in their congregation enjoy the songs. They disagree with the churches, yet can’t escape a certain something about their songs.
However, we must realize that the incredible popularity of these songs may have nothing to do with God’s blessing of the songs or even the groups. These songs aren’t always popular because they’re actually good. Rather, they’re popular because they are written to cater to the desires of our culture. In a world where we are overwhelmed with choice, people like simple lyrics because they’re safe, predictable, and offer a minimal challenge.
The science of chanting and mantras
And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. (Matthew 6:7 LSB)
Pagan practices in the past and present often feature repetitive chanting or mantras, such as religious phrases or the “OMMM” we associate with meditation. Repetition is a key part of many pagan religions because it seems to offer some sort of religious experience that can almost feel out-of-body. Repetition of simple song lyrics is also prominent in many popular worship songs, creating a unique emotional experience that participants assume is God’s presence. But there’s a reason why pagan monks and genuine Christians share similar experiences through the “meaningless repetition” that Jesus warned His followers about.
Scientists ran brain scans to see if religious chanting had any biological effect on a person. Unsurprisingly, the brain scans of someone chanting something like “Amitābha Buddha” over and over were noticeably different compared to someone who wasn’t chanting. The study concluded that this was likely due to “the reduction of self-oriented thoughts and the suspension of sensory monitoring.” In other words, religious chanting (both pagan and Christian) keeps our minds focused on a single thought and makes us lose track of our senses. This is exactly what a church participates in during the worship service linked in “Mindlessness” above.
This is consistent with many other scientific studies done on meditation. One found that “OM” chanting could deactivate areas of the brain linked to negative emotions and stress. Another studied 456 individuals from a variety of religions (including Christianity) and concluded that:
“The finding that higher self-report scores on mystical and flow states were associated with higher ratings of intentionality is consistent with research which showed mystical experiences are associated with religious beliefs. However, the finding here implies that possessing specific religious beliefs may be less important than having the broader concept of intentionality during chanting. Although intentionality can be religious, it is not always. Devotion could be toward a deity in a religious sense or attached to an attitude (feelings of love or oneness) and intentions can have religious focuses or general desires (such as the desire for peace or harmony). Therefore, these findings give a broader view of underlying themes rather than specific religious beliefs.”
Simply put, they discovered that the presence of sound (like singing), devotion to an object of your chanting (i.e. focusing on something you care about), and intentionally saying something with meaning (as opposed to gibberish) led to a greater altered state of consciousness. To understand the deceitfulness of an altered mental state, it’s worth noting that a study of over 4,000 individuals found striking similarities between those who claim to have experienced God naturally and those who experienced Him while using psychedelic drugs.
We cannot ignore the hypnotic effect of many songs used in churches today. Repeating simple song lyrics, especially in a musically-rich environment, enables us to enter an altered state of consciousness. People are taught to associate this unique feeling with the presence of God, yet the practice itself originates in pagan cultures that enjoy similar religious experiences.
Putting it all together
The point of this section isn’t to say that religious stuff is wrong because scientists and psychologists say so. As I’ve said in my previous discussions about science and psychology, we can find value in objective observations (such as cultural trends or brain scans) while rejecting the human conclusions that stem from an unbiblical worldview.
A scary reality Christians may not want to face is that the emotional experiences that felt so spiritual were manufactured by people who understand how our minds and bodies work. The weekly worship that leaves people feeling emotionally drained may not be the work of the Holy Spirit’s presence, but a similar religious experience shared by pagans. And the songs that seem so meaningful and perfect could just a part of our culture’s desire for things that are simple and disposable.
In 1980, Eugene Peterson wrote “A Long Obedience in the Same Direction” and could already see these issues emerging: “There is a great market for religious experience in our world; there is little enthusiasm for the patient acquisition of virtue, little inclination to sign up for a long apprenticeship in what earlier generations of Christians called holiness.”
These groups know that so many Christians base their truth on their experience. Even now, in light of all the biblical concerns and scientific realities, I suspect many will still reject this article’s caution for one simple reason: their experience tells them otherwise. Groups like Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation have crafted years of emotional experiences and trained people to associate those emotions with God’s presence. To question that is to threaten the foundation of what they believe is true about God.
We justify it pragmatically
Section Summary: We must be careful not to use music just because it creates a positive result. Basing music decisions on human-centered goals is dangerous. Leaving the ultimate decision for music on its popularity in the local church, its use by others, or the experience it creates can make us the standard for truth instead of God.
If you read my previous article defending the use of Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation, you may have noticed a common thread throughout many of the points people use. Many, if not all, of the justifications boiled down to “This music gets certain results, so we can overlook the problems because…” Though we must be careful when painting with a broad brush, it’s hard to ignore the presence of pragmatism.
Pragmatism explained
Pragmatism is an oft-misunderstood term that permeates so many areas of life. This way of thinking seems so normal, yet we don’t realize that it’s not a natural way for humans to determine truth. An American philosophy that began in the 1870s has become so ingrained in our culture that we can’t understand life without it.
Pragmatism is what drives the phrase “the end justifies the means.” In other words, any method is considered “good” as long as it lets us reach our goal or if others have successfully used it in the past. Likewise, we can do something without knowing how it will end, then decide if it was good based on whether we like the results.
Pragmatism is not concerned with absolute truth, but with providing a practical way of thinking. Rather than saying “Is this method in alignment with absolute truth?” it asks “Is this method useful and practical?” It doesn’t believe in absolutes, only whether something creates success. As MorningCoach explains in their practical guide to living pragmatically, “Pragmatism allows one to believe in partial truths as long as it’s something that can provide usefulness to you.” Under pragmatism, even some of the worst things can be justified as long as they get us where we need to go.
Pragmatism examples
Consider some non-church examples of pragmatism. Look at the goal, then how we can justify beliefs or behaviors because they allow people to reach that goal:
- Goal: People deserve to be happy
- No sexual behavior is wrong as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone
- All religions are equally valid as long as they aren’t intolerant of others
- Education trains students to find happiness by being good members of society
- Divorce is justified if the person no longer makes you happy
- Pregnancy can be terminated if the mother believes the baby might negatively impact their future
- Goal: People want less-expensive products faster
- Products are cheaper if we create them in certain countries, regardless of inhumane working conditions
- Products are often rushed through development and production to get them to consumers faster, coming at the expense of quality
- Music and movies are too expensive, so illegally downloading them is okay
- Goal: We want to the approval of others
- Slandering others makes us look better by comparison
- We’ll lie or “embellish the truth” to craft the narrative we want
- We’ll go into debt to live a certain lifestyle
- We use social media to makes others think we’re happily married, adventurous, wealthy, healthy, spiritual, intelligent, etc.
- Goal: Our spouse and children need to behave a certain way
- We get angry when they don’t
- We’ll manipulate them to create the behavior we want to see
- We base our love for them on how they perform
We may not approve of all the means people use to reach a goal. However, many of us can look at times that the importance of the goal has led us to carry out some of these very things, thinking they were right at the time. Pragmatism is such a part of our thinking that we likely don’t realize we’re using it in our decisions.
Many of these examples may sound very intentional and planned. However, pragmatism is also what has led to our impulsive and emotion-driven culture. We now have generations of people who act without considering the consequences and then judge those actions based on whether they gave them a positive or negative outcome.
Consider how often people feel “sorry” after being caught in something they’ve been doing for months or even years. The sorrow over choices like adultery may not be because the behavior is inherently wrong, but because the behavior eventually led to a negative consequence. During the months someone lived in adultery without a negative consequence, the act was justified because of the positive experience it created. But as soon as those means led to a bad end (i.e. getting caught and hurting their spouse), the adultery immediately pivoted from good to bad.
The discussion about pragmatism can often venture too far into technical terminology, but the above are clear ways that we see it play out in our lives and the world around us. When we have a goal, nearly anything that lets us achieve that goal is valid. Likewise, behaviors that are objectively wrong are easy to justify when they don’t come at a personal cost to us. And if we aren’t sure if something is right or wrong, we may look at what has worked for others and use that to guide us.
That isn’t to say we’ll explore any means to achieve our goals – for example, some may want their children to behave but wouldn’t dream of starving them if they disobeyed. However, the danger of pragmatism is that we can’t definitively say it’s wrong for others to accomplish their goals by methods we wouldn’t personally use.
Pragmatism in the church
The subtle danger of pragmatism in the church isn’t just that it undermines truth, but it gives us a man-centered set of goals that determines truth for us. It measures success based on positive and negative results. It encourages trying new and creative things to see what gets the best reaction, then modifying those methods to get a bigger result. It turns leadership into a set of metrics, where success or failure is determined by the number of people responding the way we desire.
Consider an area of the church where pragmatism often reveals itself: How should a pastor discuss sin from the pulpit? There are a variety of ways godly men have approached it over the years, but consider the two ways it often boils down to:
- Discuss it firmly and specifically. Show God’s hatred of it, the punishment it deserves, and why Christians should hate something that offends a holy God. This method bothers people, especially those who are unsaved or are Christians living worldly lives. However, it only says what the Bible says.
- Discuss it softly and vaguely. Replace “sin” with phrases like “messing up,” talk about how it negatively affects people’s lives, and motivate people to turn to Jesus so they’ll stop feeling guilty about their bad choices. This method is inspirational, and even unbelievers can be motivated to change. However, it shies away from the harsher parts of God that make people uncomfortable.
What should a pastor do? It depends on his goals. Does he want unbelievers to feel welcome and spiritually immature Christians to feel comfortable at church? Or is the goal to accurately preach the whole truth of God regardless of the consequences?
The core issue isn’t that a pastor has a goal, but how that pastor measures the effectiveness of their methods. If his goal is increasing attendance, minimizing negative responses, doing what other churches do, or making the church feel welcoming to God’s enemies, then the “good” of his efforts is measured by human means. Everything he does may constantly change to suit their desires. But if his goal is to be faithful to God’s word, then success is measured by whether his words and actions align with what God has said. One goal is determined by a subjective audience, the other by an absolute truth.
In his book “The Purpose Driven Church,” Rick Warren plainly demonstrates pragmatism in the church: “We should never criticize any method that God is blessing.” But as you read his book, or hear many like him justify pragmatism, how is God’s blessing determined? By measuring the numerical results of our efforts or adopting the methods of those who are more successful than us.
Thinking about church success through metrics ultimately boils down to using secular marketing practices to reach the widest customer base. This was popularized by Robert Schuller and has been a serious struggle in the church ever since. It’s reached the point that churches are even encouraged to create user profiles and segmentations, as seen by Rick Warren’s own “Saddleback Sam.”
Image courtesy of ReachRightStudios.com
Pragmatism in worship song selection
Now consider the various justifications for using music from these churches. Many acknowledge these churches and their pastors preach a different gospel. Few churches that use Bethel’s music would ever encourage their church members to seek out their books or other teachings. But their music helps leaders achieve certain goals, which justifies using them.
What are some of these goals?
- Singing music that is popular or familiar
- Generating an emotional reaction
- Creating a worship experience (as defined above)
- Doing what larger or “more successful” churches do
- Avoiding the discomfort of saying negative things about other Christians, especially those who are popular
Like anything else in the church, it’s dangerous to approach music pragmatically. It claims to want to honor God, yet humans set the measurement of that music’s success. Songs are chosen based on how the audience feels about them. Successful worship is determined by whether people had an emotional experience. The issues surrounding these churches are overlooked because of the positive results their music brings or because other churches use them.
The entire discussion surrounding music from these three churches would be unnecessary if they weren’t popular. How many music leaders would intentionally choose unpopular or unknown songs from controversial churches? How many unpopular songs enjoy a regular rotation in a church’s playlist? Yet thousands of words are written in this series alone because so many leaders want to overlook some serious problems in these churches that produce music we or others like. And, as we’ve seen, even that reveals the pragmatic motivations behind selecting these songs.
We reduce serious issues to preferences and secondary issues
This will be covered at great length in the next article. However, I want to briefly point out that many serious issues coming from these churches are minimized because of pragmatism or fear of standing against something popular amongst other Christians. We’ll see many examples of teaching a false version of Jesus, twisting Scripture, and other things that show the clear New Testament marks of a false teacher.
What we’ll see won’t be anything new, and many of them are what pastors have been warned about for years. Yet the defense for using music from these churches is that all these problems are just matters of preference or secondary issues. But how a local church handles false teachers is critically important, and reducing these issues may venture into dangerous territory that pastors are warned against throughout the New Testament.
We prevent pastors from obeying New Testament warnings
Section Summary: Pastors have a great responsibility to not only teach the truth but also protect their local church from false teachers. They must seriously and carefully consider these warnings when using music from churches that don’t teach a true gospel.
Reflect on God’s many warnings to the New Testament church about how we must respond to false teachings and the teachers who spread them. As you do, ask yourself one question: Does using music from these churches allow you to obey these warnings?
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. (Acts 20:28-30 LSB)
Does using music from these churches take serious steps in protecting the flock from savage wolves? Are pastors responsible for members of the flock being drawn away by false teachers who are invited into the church through their music?
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons….. In pointing out these things to the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following. But refuse godless myths fit only for old women. On the other hand, train yourself for the purpose of godliness (1 Timothy 4:1, 6-7 LSB)
Does using music from these churches take a stand against deceitful teachings and doctrines of demons?
I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. (2 Timothy 4:1-4)
Does using music from these churches push people toward teachers who will tickle their ears?
Therefore, beloved, since you are looking for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest you, having been carried away by the error of unprincipled men, fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. (2 Peter 3:14–18 LSB)
Does using music from these churches put us or our churches in danger of being carried away by “unprincipled men” who distort God’s word?
I marvel that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is really not another, only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to the gospel we have proclaimed to you, let him be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is proclaiming to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed! (Galatians 1:6-9 LSB)
Does using music from these churches bind us with accursed people who distort the gospel of Christ?
These are questions all pastors must answer about anything they allow into their local church. This goes beyond taking the good songs and rejecting the bad ones. We can’t simply justify their use because they’re popular, we’ve had an emotional experience with them, or even because other pastors use them.
Consider that using these songs teaches people more than what the lyrics themselves say. A poor theology of worship leads people to a poor understanding of their relationship with God, reducing it to nothing more than a subjective emotional experience that is barely distinguishable from a pagan religious experience. As stewards of the time and money God gives us, we waste those resources on churches that aren’t true churches of Jesus Christ. We send people to the very ministries we warn people against when we plug them into a pipeline that exists to direct people to the churches that create the music. And, in the end, we find ways to justify it by focusing on the immediate benefits more than the New Testament warnings of associating with false teachers.
We also want to be careful about letting our analysis stop at “As long as it’s true and talks about Jesus, it’s acceptable.” These are vitally important standards, but may not be the only thing a leader must consider. Many who use music from Bill Johnson’s church wouldn’t quote him from the pulpit, promote a book if it was in full agreement with their local church’s beliefs, nor ask him to be a guest preacher if they could guarantee he wouldn’t preach anything false from the pulpit.
Likewise, most churches wouldn’t sing a song written by Planned Parenthood, no matter how true it was. But why? If they could produce something good and true about Jesus, what makes using the song unacceptable? Any church that preaches a false gospel is just as much of an enemy of Jesus Christ as an organization that kills unborn babies.
These are serious considerations. Should we invite false teachers into our church? Should we allow enemies of the cross to lead us in worshipping our Savior? Can we say we’re honoring our God with our reasons for using them?
Of course, these warnings assume church leaders fully understand the false teaching in one or more of these churches. However, I know many may think these churches teach a true gospel but may have a few odd teachings that people disagree with. My next articles will break down some of the greatest problems in each of these churches and show why we should be concerned about more than disagreements about less important things. Until then, see the resources below to get a glimpse at some of the problems present in each church:
Bethel: Bethel’s False Gospel and Other Issues (Exploring the Worship Music Debate #3) (This is the next article in this series)
Hillsong: Is Hillsong a biblically solid church? (Got Questions)
Elevation: Concerns About Elevation Church (Baptist 21) and The False Teaching of Steven Furtick (God Words)
Final thoughts
I don’t write this article lightly. There are strong emotions tied to these groups, and questioning them can be seen as a threat to a person’s very identity and spirituality. However, I also recognize that many Christians have accepted or rejected these groups without question, often because people around them have done the same.
My desire isn’t to tell you what to believe but to help you as you try to understand why you accept or reject music from these churches.
Using music from these churches doesn’t make someone a false teacher. Knowing the issues raised in this article and continuing to sing music from these churches shouldn’t make us question someone’s salvation. However, Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation do preach a false gospel, and it’s important to look beyond their enjoyable music when deciding how much God wants us to integrate false teachers into a true church of Jesus Christ.
To non-pastors
A brief note to non-pastors reading this: be careful. As shepherds called by Jesus Christ, your pastors have a serious calling from God to preach the gospel and protect their flock. Don’t immediately assume that any pastor who allows these churches needs to be attacked.
If you struggle with using these groups in your church, talk to those shepherds with humility and honor. Understand that your pastors may not be in unrepentant sin, but instead, it may be a matter of wisdom where they don’t see the sin issue as you do. That may not excuse it, but it can help us realize that pastors who invite this music into their churches are rarely choosing to rebel against God by doing so.
No Bible-centered church is perfect. No leader in any church will get everything right. We must all find the line between what is of absolute importance in our local church and what compromises we can accept. Your church doesn’t exist to cater to all your preferences but to bring you into a local community where you:
- Worship as a body of believers (Ephesians 5:18-19)
- Serve one another (1 Peter 4:10)
- Observe the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:26) and baptism (Matthew 28:19-20)
- Learn and grow together under biblical teaching (Acts 2:42)
- Engage in evangelism and discipleship (Matthew 28:20)
- Submit to your leaders (Hebrews 13:17), following them as they follow Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1) and protect you from false teachers (Acts 20:28-30)
If using this music doesn’t inhibit any of those, seriously consider whether it’s worth dividing over. Remember to seek God through prayer and His word, not your preferences or emotional reactions to this article. Likewise, don’t overlook something you believe is a serious compromise because you fear discomfort or unpopularity. In situations like this, honor and obedience to God and His word must be our greatest desire.
Closing thought
One thing I want to make very clear about this series: it may focus on music, but it’s not about the music. The core issue is how we make decisions in the church and in our personal lives. Musical selection is a symptom of that decision-making process, but that process affects more than music:
What leads us to accept or reject something? What do we use to define things like worship? What safeguards are in place that keep out things that dishonor Jesus while allowing us the freedom to enjoy a variety of things that do honor Him? What does it look like for pastors to protect their flock from false teachers? How do we evaluate whether our beliefs and actions show that the Bible is our highest source of truth?
This series exists to help everyone understand this debate at the deepest level possible. Both sides have things they understand well and things they understand poorly. By fully examining both sides, I hope you feel equipped to better understand what you believe about using music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation, but most importantly why you believe it.
Pingback: Why Churches Can Sing Music from Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation (Exploring the Worship Music Debate, Part 1) – Onward in the Faith