Churches changing lyrics to worship songs.

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ben Atkins on November 16, 2007 at 5:42pm

That's silly with the blessed be your name - He does indeed give and take away. Its actually straight out of the bible as well. A verse from Job I think.

I would consider each issue on grounds of a few things, most of all probably the question: is it in the bible?

Permalink Reply by Nathaniel Freeman on November 16, 2007 at 6:09pm

i agree with you completely Ben, it isin the bible. However.... i used to belong to a church that preached the prosperity gospel. They followed a teaching by Terry Law on a video of his where by he said and I quote 'not everything in the Bible is true'. What he was meaning was that this was an expression that Job made recorded in the Bible rather than a Biblical truth. However, what Terry Law clearly fails to spot is that just slightly later on the Bible says that 'Job did not sin in all that he said and did,' so Job must have hit the nail on the head in saying this otheriwse he would have misjudged God and be sinning. However, as you've guessed it both terry Law and the church I belonged to had selected reading (not hearing) and could never acknowledge eiether that God could also take away.

So to not acknowledge that God takes away is totallly tehologically incorrect.

Permalink Reply by Phil Williams on November 19, 2007 at 9:07am

Hi Nathaniel,

I'm not sure I totally agree with you on this one. I do believe that just because something is 'in' the Bible it doesn't mean it is correct. I'm sure you all agree that there are plenty of things that go on in the Bible that are wrong - i.e. David and Bathsheeba. There are also others stories/situations in the Bible that aren't as clear cut...and I think the 'You give and take away' one is an example of one of those. There are things that went on in the Old Testament that most definately were right at the time, and therefore not sin, but today would be totally wrong. For example Elijah called fire down from heaven which killed many soldiers (was it 102 I think?), but when Jesus' disciples suggested to Jesus that they do the same thing they were rebuked by Him. This was appropriate under the Old Testament but quite obviously not under the New Testament of grace - Jesus said he had come to save life and not destroy it.

In the same way, I actually do struggle with that line: "You give and take away" as it often implies that God takes life away and good things away....whereas this most definately wasn't the example Jesus set. So if I have to sing that line I will normally think of it as God takes away things like sin, sickness, condemnation etc rather than God strikes down family members, takes away posessions etc (as in Jobs case).

Thanks for listening :-)

Phil

Permalink Reply by Nathaniel Freeman on November 19, 2007 at 11:06am

In response too. And I think many of the prosperity teaches miss this point in a fantastic fashion. If you read the story of Job and take the turn of events back to its origins it was actually God who orchastrated it all. If God had not pointed out Job to the Devil he would have been on his merry way and not done anything to him.

I agree with Rob, I think that to say God cannot take away limits God in our understanding of Him. It also limits God to understanding the concept of good and bad to within our reasoning. When my father passed away 6 years ago I believe it was all part of God's plan. Others in the Church told our family that my father was not living in his destiny (as they believed that God wants all GOOD Christians to have perfect health, a perfect job, lots of money and ots of good friends) as God would never send anything 'bad' so it had to be a result of something he had done or was not doing?!?!?! The actual fact was that he just had cancer. After he had passed away I came to the understanding that if God can do that, but still if we asked Him for anything (and we asked for healing) and He would not give us something bad but good, and if all his plans are to prosper us and not to harm us, then who better to trust that someone who could take my father away and still it be our destiny and the best for myself and the rest of my family.

Like I said above, we can alsoe not get around the fact that the Bible does not condemn Job for his statement and that he did not sin in all that he said and did. Infact there were those around him who said that you must have done something to deserve this. God's response at the end is look at what I have made, look at what I do everyday and look at who I am, I am in control of it all trust me!!! It is all part of my plan and purpose!!! Much is the same respons in many of David's Psalms. I think the song echos these sentimets more than the taking away of sickness etc. The New Testament even prasies sufferings, persecutions and afflictions saying that they are an honour to have as you know then that you are doing your job as a Christian, but also they are developing your character.

We have to make the most of the though and hard times and search for God's purpose in them rather than simply dismissing them out of hand as just an attack from the Devil. It may be an attack, but if it is God has allowed it to happen for a purpose and by finding Him in it we defeat the Devil's purpose in it all and give God the victory.

Permalink Reply by Phil Williams on November 19, 2007 at 11:25am

Agreed :-)

Permalink Reply by Ben Atkins on November 19, 2007 at 11:52am

There should be a whole group on Job I think!! Slightly aside... Doesn't Job fall into the 'poetry' category of the books in the bible? Reading it all the way through, it does come across as being fairly poetic in the way it is written and composed as well. Looking at it as a rather long and epic poem may help get our heads around it at times, whether it was written as a poem or not.

Permalink Reply by Gav on November 16, 2007 at 6:14pm

thanks for your thoughts guys, the job example was just an example. i'd be more interested to what people thought about the changing lyrics being illegal thing. any thoughts on that?

Permalink Reply by Jono on November 16, 2007 at 11:29pm

Is it illegal? As far as my understanding of copyright laws, it doesn't. After all, most bands change the lyrics of their songs in live sets to suit the crowd they're playing to. I really doubt you can approach this on a legal viewpoint. The only way to view this strange idea is to say it was writen that way and should be sung that way. You don't like it, then on your bike.

Permalink Reply by Nathaniel Freeman on November 16, 2007 at 11:30pm

I think that copyright laws are to stop plagerism rather than changing or adapting lyrics

Permalink Reply by Mike Kerslake on January 2, 2009 at 5:54pm

A few years ago I was sorting copyright for a church before CCLI licensing was widespread. We didn't have cover for our use of the very widely sung song "Worthy, O Worthy are You Lord" so I got permission (for a fee) from the publishers. A condition they imposed was that the lyrics were not altered at all, and the copyright holder should be acknowledged.

I can see the point to this. If I were Matt Redman, and someone changed my lyric "You give and take away" to "You give and bless the day" I would not be happy. It significantly changes the sense of the song and corrupts the rest of the biblical reference to Job 1. So I would not want my name to be associated with it.

Most lyric adjustments are less theologically controversial. The problem I had was that very widely sung song "Worthy, O Worthy are You, Lord" is actually writted as "Worthy, O Worthy is the Lord". Which is not theologically a problem but it does rather change the way you would use the song. And it gave me a dilemma - do I show the words in the strictly correct form, which everyone else will say is wrong, or the "popular" version, which would technically be in breach of contract?.....

Another example: I notice another old favourite "Jesus, we enthrone You" is actually shown as "Lord Jesus, we enthrone You" in Songs of Fellowship with the former wording shown as "alternative words". Perhaps another example of a popular version taking over from the original version?

Permalink Reply by Ben Atkins on November 16, 2007 at 7:04pm

Oh yeah I was going to come back to that!

My own opinion at the moment is I think that it depends on whether the changes that you make are helping the song to facilitate the congregational worship better than it would in its original state.

If it is only a minor lyrical change (just one word) then I guess I would probably allow it (probably after writing/emailing the songwriter) asking if it was okay. If it was a bigger lyrical change (a whole phrase/idea in the song) I would probably just not sing the song, or just use the chorus (if the issue is with the verse).

The last two options I would be probably more likely to go for as they respect the copyright.

I do however feel that the copyright is there to protect from plagiarism (sp?) on a mass scale eg. taking the lyrics or tune for your own song for your own personal gain.

I will probably talk more on this later but I have to have dinner now! Oh the joys of being a child.

Permalink Reply by Sarah Girling on November 16, 2007 at 10:10pm

I would say either use it or don't use it but don't change the lyrics! It's not legal and it shows no respect for the person that wrote the song in the first place. It's fairly simple not to use a song if you don't agree with the theology. But I often see things as black and white....

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page