Bones to Pick?

Well, not exactly bones to pick, but a few observations and opinions. Kinda off the top of my head, stream of consciousness semi-rant/opinions/observations. . .


Churches often shortchange their congregations in corporate worship in several different ways. Both contemporary “praise and worship”-oriented and traditional-format churches are guilty, IMO. Of the two essential areas areas of worship—gospel proclamation and corporate expression of worship, I’ll leave aside the neglect of gospel proclamation for now and focus on corporate expression of worship.

The first thing to dispense with is the execrable phrase “praise and worship,” because the shallowness of contemporary “praise and worship” services impeach themselves with that very phrase. Praise is one of many elements of worship. Other elements include expressions of confession, repentance and reconciliation, adoration, gratitude, giving and, of course, praise, to touch on some main elements of worship. But on top of the shallow representation of worship, the shallow expressions offered in congregational participation deny church-goers opportunity for deeper corporate expressions of worship.

And then there is the reprehensible trend in many contemporary churches to turn what should be a communal expression into a performance experience, turning the congregation into a passive audience. *smh* There is a place, IMO, for choirs, etc., but not to the extent that they dominate what should be the BIG CHOIR: those who are in the pews.

But are traditional worship services really better? Often, not. The most traditional are churches that follow a strict liturgy, even to the point of congregational worship expressions being solely from a psalter—singing the psalms (though often altered for meter). But what, I ask of Colossians 3:16 (echoed in Ephesians 5:19)?

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

There is more to express in corporate worship than can be expressed solely through a Psalter. How do hymns differ from Psalms? Are some Psalms effectively hymns? What are “spiritual songs” and how do they differ from Psalms and hymns? Clergy or lay folk who lead corporate worship should think deeply about that, and about how to lead their congregation in sharing a wider, deeper, fuller expression of worship. What does a spiritual or Gospel (no, not the popular genre that is usually NOT an expression of the Gospel) song offer that might not be as easily expressed in a hymn or a Psalm?

Of course, there are other considerations, but those, IMO, are more “inside baseball” topics for church musicians, though, sadly, from my experience they are topics not often seriously considered by church musicians. *profound sigh*


OK, a bones to pick with liturgical churches where congregational singing is “led” from the organ. Every single church I have known over my lifetime where this was the case—and every example of such I can find on the Internet nowadays—has demonstrated absolutely execrable congregational singing. The “Big Choir” is both poorly-led and almost completely overshadowed by excessive volume from the organ. I would much rather hear a cappella congregational singing from any Church of Christ congregation (despite their shameful twisting of scripture making a cappella singing de riguer) than listen to a misled congregation being drowned out by an organist who doesn’t bother to listen to the “Big Choir.”

But maybe that’s just me.

Freedom! (?)

You do realize the two greatest benefits that would accrue from going back to a federal government that actually operated within the confines of its delegated powers, right?

    1. Elimination of at least 80% of the government workforce (since at least that much of the “feddle gummint” is outside constitutional legitimacy). It’d be MUCH less expensive to put all those bureaucraps on welfare than to continue to pay them and have them waste even more money on illegitimate crap.
  1.  Get the “feddle (rhymes with ‘meddle’) gummint” out of your life, as long as you do not violate the ACTUAL inherent rights of others.

Add in the FairTax and the federal government could become what it was intended to be: a defender of inerent rights whose significance is only brought to mind when it stomps on thugs violating (GENUINE, INHERENT) individual rights and on patriotic holidays.

It’d be a start. . .

Feeding Frenzy

*munches popcorn-sips beer* Watching all the Hivemind Podpeople flipping the cover they’ve run for CwaZy (pervy, racist) UnKa JoE, ZOMBIE POOPY-PANTS President in Name Only for years (even before his puppet presidency) is entertaining. Cannibals consuming one of their own. Finally CwaZy (pervy, racist) UnKa JoE, ZOMBIE POOPY-PANTS President in Name Only gets a reunion with Uncle Josie.

One could not ask for a better reveal of the Hivemind’s basic nature as a Fake News Machine®.

“You’re lost in the woods. What gun do you take with you for all purposes?”

Silly question. Presupposes I could get lost in the woods. Maps. Compass. Planning. Oh, plane crash? Outlier. Supposes I were to a.) get on a plane despite my aversion to Thugs Standing Around, b.) disregards the hassle would I have to put up with to even be ABLE to transport a firearm past Thugs Standing Around and c.) I’d still have a compass in stupidly TSA-limited EDC bag *heh*) and general knowledge of the area downed in.

Still, noodling around in the woods, if only one firearm carried, it’d probably be a Ruger 10/22 Takedown (model 11100, because 18.5” barrel as opposed to the 16.x” barrel. There’s room in the pack). If allowed 2, then selecting a handgun would be variable. Depends on area. Alaska? Yeh, not going there, and not only because I don’t want a .44 magnum as a backup. *ouch* Don’t own one anyway. VERY different to piney woods in America’s Third World County™ where a handgun that can handle “snakeshot” might be the choice (depending, in part, on area and season).

Still, “lost in the woods”? Who does that? Oh, yeh. Dunning-Krugerands. The same folks as would ask such a silly question. Got it.

It’s the Little Things #4,831 *heh*

I kinda wonder sometimes. . . I see snippets of TV (because I rarely see anything worth watching for a longer time), and programs that show characters riding horseback are, at best, a mixed bag. Sometimes, they’re just sacks of potatoes jouncing along. Painfully. At other times, I see riders posting the trot, but even then it’s usually very badly–often because their stirrups are badly hung.

I really have to wonder what the various people involved in the filming–from the actors to the directors to, well, whatever horse wrangler they may (or may not?) have are thinking. *smh*

But then, there’s the “Little Thing” #10 (and I am surprised there are any more highly ranked, but then. . . ): complete, total, and absolute blank space where firearms knowledge should exist in the script, direction, and action. That’s higher ranked, of course, because it’s dangerous (and not only on the set!).

Lies, Damned Lies, and “News”

NEVER (as in DO NOT EVER) take “reporting” on ANYTHING about ANY scientific research as anywhere near what the actual research may (or may not) have shown. EVERY Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind “report” on science in the last couple of decades, at least, that I have read has either been grossly inaccurate (because of stupidity–willful or otherwise–in the reporting and editorial staff? Quite often) or a deliberate attempt to deceive for scaremongering purposes. If the topic is at al interesting to you, LOOK UP THE ACTUAL RESEARCH and read the actual paper cited, if available. It is the only way to discover whether the Hivemind “report” is lying to you or not. Well, you could ask your friendly neighborhood scientist to review it for you, I suppose. ? If you know one who is honest and can actually do decent research.

Gather up all your hens’ teeth to pay for the consultation, though.

People Just Gonna “Peep”

Yeh, it’s a bit small-minded of me, but what can I say? Those folks who assert that music in a Xian church can ONLY be a cappella–no instruments–like to say that musical instruments featured in worship in the Book of Revelation don’t count because references to musical instruments in Revelation don’t mean what they say. Like, for example, the words in the Lord’s Prayer, “Thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven” apparently do not mean what they say, either. *shrugs* Their self-deception is no greater than those who assert that ONLY Psalm-singing is allowed, for some obscure, unscriptural reasons they rationalize with eisegesis and hand-waving.

It’s just the way of folks to lie to themselves to justify their own biases, ya know?