Scorch
Monday, April 19, 2010 @ 8:14 pm.
Today I'm only going to blog about Chapel. I always end up with a lot of burning comments after chapel services that only die off during the week. So I need to let them out now, because today was almost the epitome of all of them.
Chapel
Chapel from a class that I can't remember. A pretty good example of singers-outnumbering-musicians that you tend to see a lot of at MGS chapels, though for Sec 4 chapels I'm not that irked because classes may not have enough musicians etc.
But this time there was only one instrument, the piano (granted the piano player was competent enough to go solo, something that I could never ever do), and
three singers.
I'm just going to say right here that there was nothing wrong with today's band; today's band was actually quite good. But this is just me being irritable. Sorry. I need to put it all here before I go berserk.Usually I get pissed off enough because not only are there three singers they make no attempt to do anything with the proliferation (or even
eutrophication, read, excess) of vocal resources. Like harmonies. Most of the time the singers stand in a row around two microphones and drone out the songs.
Of course, MGS girls somehow usually are cultured to sing like this, which accounts for the clean choir-ish (not even close though), pure tones that each and every guest worship leader stops to listen to, and some say "I Should make a recording with you guys!" Because really, MGS girls sing a lot.
Anyway. Continuing.
I'm not going to blame anyone for the whole harmonies thing; it just distracts me because
why don't people do that? although they might not even have thought of it in the first place and therefore isn't anyone's fault.
I don't like it, though, that people say hey everyone let's wake up! or come on let's be enthusiastic for God! and they stand there in their row fidgeting with their hands in front of them and their eyes glued to the lyrics in front of them.
The most effective student chapel bands, I find, have fewer singers, no lyrics (for the most part) and that actually make an attempt to get involved. I've grown up in a charismatic worship environment, so I'm naturally rather biased towards this (go to Tze Shien's blog for an opposite viewpoint) but seriously, if you're singing contemporary charismatic songs that go "Lift up your hands, open the doors, let the King of Glory come in" while circling your hands in soft claps monotonously for the entire song, who's going to take you seriously?
And also, there were two types of prayers seen during this worship session, both of which seem rather characteristic of MGS: One where you say "Lord" in every sentence, and another that's prepared on a script and you read off it. I don't mind either one; the "Lord" one is pretty much status quo in MGS, and I know from chapel band experience that they actually
recommend that you prepare your prayer.
It makes me sad. There's nothing wrong with it but it just... makes me sad.
Anyway, today's speaker.
For the unfamiliar, I should probably give a short summary of what this was about but... frankly I can't. It was too confusing.
Today's speaker was familiar; I know his face and first name from previous chapel band adventures but other than that I'm pretty sure he's forgotten me already. I was expecting something good from him, but as soon as I saw "Unclogging your Arteries: Freeing your Heart from Sin" I was almost going to walk out of the chapel.
Firstly, after Bio I have a terrible fear of heart attacks. (this just adds on to other things like appendicitis and various cancers so I can't really say anything about that)
Secondly, Freeing your Heart from Sin. I assumed that Uncle Jo was talking to current Christians since that's what all chapel speakers usually do except for DJW. After pretty much a year at New Creation Church, which preaches "radical grace" and I'm not afraid to admit it, I'm not going to accept any more crap of Christians still needing to beg forgiveness each time they sin because I believe that Jesus has already died for all our sins, not just our inherited sins,
all our sins, so we don't need to be condemned under the law where every sin without sacrificial rituals means you go to hell.
It's not about "oh if all our sins are forgiven then we can just sin and sin and sin and not be punished!" You've been pulled out of the water. So you, naturally, won't be drowning.
Okay, I didn't want to blog today to summarise NCC's doctrine. Here I go again.
So I wasn't about to take any more crap about living under the law and cleansing our hearts regularly like another lamb sacrifice. Isn't the Lamb of
God enough for you?
But he didn't address that issue at all, in the end. More of "Are you sure you're going to go to heaven?" and he did mention Jesus dying for our sins, so I assumed then he was talking to those not of the Christian faith.
So it wasn't as bad, but I'm still really really pissed off by people who quote Romans 3:23:
23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
without quoting Romans 3:24:
24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Look at that difference. If only people would actually acknowledge that. Maybe this speaker did, somewhere, but I didn't see it through the Simpsons references and Adam-Eve-Steve-Jane spiel.
Okay, I should probably attempt a brief summary before I continue or people will start getting confused:
First, a personal recount about high cholesterol. And controlling your diet. And a drawn-out story of a guy who died after controlling his diet for a long time and then went to heaven, then scolded his wife saying "if I hadn't controlled my diet I would be here ten years ago!". Then suddenly "But are you so sure you're going to go to heaven?". Then "Why is God so distant?" Then ROMANS 3:23 in huge fancy font. Then "Why don't people accept God?" because they don't want to live under the Christian principles. Then the evolution and Adam-Eve not Adam-Steve spiel being products of "people living in the world; what they want" with no explanation, and ROMANS 3:23 again.
And finally a weird story about the Simpsons which ended with "Do accept Jesus, God really does want you to pass with a D-; Death-minus." And there it ended.
Yeah... sorry for the rather convoluted nature of this, but... I was really, really confused.
The rest can be summed up in this excerpt from Carolyn's blog:
#major anger at chapel speaker.
come back and diss evolution when you can come up with a better idea. you, plus your self-assuredness, really REALLY irked me.
so what if your god made adam and eve (not steve, oh no we can't possibly have two guys!). you don't have to make it some dandy little joke.
so where does your argument stand if I told you I reject all you said. proselytisation at its most mediocre. can you at least have some respect for science! just fyi scientists don't think we're apes. yeah, though don't worry I'm sure people like you are the closest specimens.
lost my respect + so tempted to just walk out man.
on the other hand, at least my class is mature enough to not think gay is a funny word. props to you guys.
See, if the speaker was actually addressing the non-Christian cohort he obviously wasn't doing a very good job of it.
If one wants to classify homosexuality and bigamy and polygamy as a sin, and at the same time remain convincing and compelling to a non-Christian audience, then one has to explain why, not because "people live like this because they live in the world; what they want". Not "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve".
I'm sorry Carolyn, I have to admit I started giggling a little when he started veering off to adding "Jane and Carol and even David and Daniel in between" because it was just getting too ridiculous.
Even as a Christian, albeit young, I remain unsure about the Christian stance towards homosexuality and its groundings. I choose to take that stance, however, as I continue to learn.
But this didn't help me at all. And won't help anyone else either.
So all in all, the message was confusing, didn't really answer any of my questions, didn't really make a point (The most I got was "to cleanse your heart of sins, go to Jesus" which was alright, but only made in the last few sentences rendering the first fifteen minutes rather irrelevant), and frankly touched far too many of my soft spots.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I need to have some sense slapped into me. But I didn't get it at all.
I was tempted to approach the speaker after Chapel and argue my point, but I was in the gallery and, by the end of the message, far too confused to even consider it.