“We Evangelicals have come to view the word ‘worship’ as referring to something like God-focused music. And music is inherently emotional. So it follows that our understanding of ‘worship’ could then be reduced to the personal expression of a God-centered, emotional experience.” - CLeaders
- About
- Forum
- Account
Discussion
NewWell said, at least in part
I appreciate how the writer comes out against defining music as "THE" service part of worship, then tending to make that service (Hebrew avad, Greek latreuo, etc.) a very emotional and non-intellectual substitute for other portions of a liturgy like teaching/preaching, prayer, reading of Scripture, and the like. And that is an extension, I think, of using one word "worship" to denote both "prostration" and "service". We use one word for both, and eventually, we end up limiting the senses of both words into one application of one of them.
It is my soapbox, I confess (guilty as charged), but I think it would be healthy if we started referring to key parts of a standard "worship" service by their own names, and perhaps we would grasp how important they are.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
NewLanguage
It’s one of the many cases where the literal meaning of a word is not the functional meaning, though it still retains that connotation.
The most common word for ‘worship’ in the NT is προσκυνέω, proskuneo
The second most common is λατρεύω, latreuo
They are both usually translated simply “worship” because they both usually mean “worship.”
We do lose something in the translation, for sure. The problem is that proskuneo means more than just bowing and latreuo means more than just serving. So using either of those English words would overly limit the meaning.
But I don’t disagree that we’d benefit from pondering these nuances more.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.