Quote
Pilgrim said:
For the sake of clarity, would you be so kind as to enumerate those "elements" which define contemporary worship, e.g., the type of music (rhythm and lyrics) and other such things and which you would say distinguish it from traditional worship?

This is exactly why I think trying to make blanket statements using these terms is so flawed. Contemporary is such a broad genre, now. It seems to range from songs meant to be used during worship services to those written more for radio play.

The same goes for traditional. The timeline for a traditional song's authorship keeps creeping ever nearer. Some even feel all that is necessary is the switch from guitar to organ and viola. The song is "fixed."

I do not think that rhythm is so easy to define in a medium such as this but I will say that lyrics which convey the truths found in scripture and creeds coupled with an arrangement which keeps the worshiper within the realm of the fruits of the Spirit such as love, joy, peace, etc. are an excellent place to start.

Quote
Pilgrim said:
But this surely begs several questions such as: what is acceptable "focus"? what regulates this "focus"? was Cain's "focus" acceptable to the Lord? what does one worshiping the Lord in "truth" entail? et al <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" />

Acceptable focus is and always will be that which is pleasing to God. The inclusion of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs along with a variety of instruments is shown through scripture as acceptable forms of worship.

I seem to get the impression that you do not feel contemporary music capable of being acceptable or "truth." May I ask why not?

"Nothing can be more insulting to God than to presume to examine His Word, professing a desire to learn His mind, when we have already settled to our own satisfaction what it will say."
~A.W. Pink