“Kinda weird, but not a sin” has become a common saying in my household. My husband and I say this jokingly about hilarious fail videos or the quirky things we catch each other doing. But when it comes to worship music, this saying hits on an important point: there are more than two black-and-white categories. Yes, some music is objectively inappropriate in worship, while some pieces seem to be objectively good. However, the reason we have an ongoing debate over whether or not to use music by Bethel and Hillsong is because there is a gray area when it comes to discerning goodness music, art, and expression.

Good or Bad?

I wrote in a previous article about the three critical areas of goodness in Christian life and worship. These include doctrinal goodness (truth, understanding, right belief), moral goodness (obedience, justice, integrity), and creative goodness (beauty, diligence, skillfulness).

Evaluating goodness in worship music requires us to begin by examining the doctrinal and moral origins, proclamations, and implications of the song, singer, or songwriter. This sounds simple in theory, but clearly, it has not been as easily accomplished, or I would not be writing this article series. Too often, those of us with musical training or strict musical tastes jump ahead to questions of aesthetic goodness. Now, aesthetics are important, but let’s remember that we are discussing worship music, not concert music. This compels us to ask “What is this song saying and doing? and “Is what it’s saying and doing pleasing to God?” before we jump ahead to asking, “How is it composed?” and “Does it please us?”

That said, let’s consider a few practical examples. I once attended a Christmas Eve service where the opening song was “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch.” I’m not kidding. I wish I were, but I’m not.

The story of the Grinch might be a sweet example of common grace, but that catchy song certainly does not proclaim a biblical theology of the incarnation…

Likewise, the Grinch might inspire us to stop swiping toys from children and instead join in a general season of giving, but does it encourage genuine Spirit-led generosity and obedience? It certainly does not image or inspire reverence…

As fun as the Grinch and his anthem might be, there’s no point in moving forward to discussing aesthetics here. It does not meet the most basic standard for a worship song—praising God—so worship leaders should not touch this song, even with a “thirty-nine-and-a-half-foot-pole.”

When we cannot make a case for a song being rooted in biblical theology, we can’t use it in worship. Sorry, Dr. Seuss.

On the other hand, I think most professing Christians would agree that John Newton’s “Amazing Grace” is the gold standard for worship music. “New Britain” (the tune most frequently associated with “Amazing Grace”) is memorable, attainable, and affective. It sticks in our minds, suits our voices, and spurs our emotions toward virtue. Likewise, the text of “Amazing Grace” has endured the test of time. It is theologically sound, beautifully written, and emotionally powerful. However, it avoids high-brow theologizing, proclaiming the gospel in terms children can understand and the wise can cherish. Both tune and text meet the criteria for doctrinal goodness and moral goodness, and boldly proclaim these with creative integrity and beauty.

The poet, too, meets the criteria for goodness as a fruit of the Spirit. John Newton did not have a perfect track record—far from it—and most of us are familiar with his drastic conversion story. Although Newton was not good on his own virtue, his repentance and transformation testify to God’s goodness—and that’s the whole point. Apart from God, we are not good and we do no good. Goodness, in human beings and the art we create, is all about engaging and imaging God’s goodness. How do we image God’s goodness? We believe what He tells us (doctrinal goodness), do what He commands us (moral goodness), and steward the gifts He has given us (creative goodness).

Doctrinal/Theological Goodness

Let’s cut to the chase: are Bethel and Hillsong good?

First of all, are their songs doctrinally sound? Some, sure. Others, maybe not so much. I admit I only have overt theological disagreements with a few of their songs. However, is this because their songs are orthodox or because they are ambiguous? I’ve noticed that many popular worship songs do not carry a continuous, clearly-defined thought throughout their verses and choruses. This softens any potential theological issues because the song then is a musical chameleon, capable of meaning one thing to one person and another thing to another. To a Bible-believing church, a song might seem true because congregants are listening according to a thoroughly biblical worldview. The same songs, though, might be used in a church with a low view of scripture and a man-centered message. Why? Because without clearly defined words and articulate, complete thoughts, such songs can mean (or not mean) whatever worshipers want.

Here’s an example: At our weekly prayer gatherings, my church family and I pray for a revival in our area. And yet, when I first heard Bethel Music belt, “God of revival, pour it out, pour it out,” I felt a check in my spirit.

Shouldn’t I sing along? I want revival, don’t I?

As I listened to the rest of the song and examined the beliefs of its writers, I realized why I struggled to sing along: we mean different things by revival.

As a member of Prairie Bible Church, I earnestly desire revival—but one rooted in the renewed study of, delight in, and obedience to scripture.

Many songs by Bethel and Hillsong seem orthodox and, used by discerning worship leaders, can be made to proclaim biblical theology. However, knowing that Bethel and Hillsong have some questionable beliefs, we should not assume that our theological dialects are the same. We must investigate their vocabulary and define our terms.

Moral/Behavioral Goodness

Alright, second question: Do Bethel and Hillsong’s songs encourage reverence and righteousness? The answer depends not merely on what the songs say but how.

A couple years ago, someone gifted Billy and me tickets to see Chris Tomlin and Bethel Music in concert. “I Will Rise” and “Our God” were the anthems of my childhood, so I was thrilled. To get to Chris Tomlin, though, I had to sit through a few hours of Bethel—plenty of time to do a deep dive into their beliefs and examine how those beliefs manifested in their lyrics and performance.

I was troubled, to say the least.

A sea of people jumped and held their hands toward the Bethel singers. These people probably were raising their hands in worship, but it looked like they were trying to reach the performers, to grasp their greatness rather than the greatness of God. The singers danced and interacted with the crowd. It felt exactly like a secular concert except with worship songs.

Was this reverence? If so, was it the reverence of celebrities or of God? Perhaps it was different for each person. Perhaps it is a Titus 1:15-16 situation:

¹⁵ To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. ¹⁶ They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work.

Titus 1:15-16, ESV

Perhaps this concert was praising and pursuing God’s goodness. Perhaps not. Again, nothing was explicitly wrong, but something still didn’t feel quite right.

By now, it seems clearer that discerning goodness in worship is, well, not always clear. So let’s talk about a third category, one which I think will prove helpful as we think about all worship practices, musical or otherwise…

Good vs. Not Good

It would be lovely if all decisions we faced as worship leaders were as straightforward as choosing between “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch” or “Amazing Grace.”

Instead of simply sorting music and musicians into good and bad files, we often have to discern what is not good—i.e., not wrong but not the best. Again, consider the humorous phrase, “kinda weird but not a sin.” It may not be a blatant sin to use certain songs in worship, but is that all we are called to? To simply avoid what is obviously bad? What a low, legalistic view of the Christian life!

As new creations, we are called not only to avoid sin but to pursue goodness—and goodness is far more than just “not badness.” We are not simply called to avoid what is bad but to pursue what is wholly good. I might not be doing something evil if I program an ambiguous or generally “meh” song for worship, but I certainly would be doing less than I could—less than my best.

In my book, Fruitful Worship, I exposit the creation account in Genesis as a pattern for goodness in art—including worship music. What I find fascinating is that, even in a world without sin, God still identifies three qualitative categories: good, not good, and very good.

With each stage of creation, God pronounces His work “good.” But then, after creating Adam, He says something surprising, “Not good.” Specifically, God declares that it is not good for man to be alone. It was not sinful or evil, but Adam all alone was also not ready to be pronounced “good.”

“Not good” is not a condemnation, but it identifies something that was not truly pleasing to God or fulfilling for man. It was not sinful for Adam to be alone, but neither was it up to God’s generous, beautiful, relational standard of goodness!

With the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib, God established the first and most intimate form of human community: marriage. Adam bursts forth in poetry—perhaps even song—and God declares this perfect, sinless, complementary community as “very good.”

We do not often think of Genesis 1-2 in relation to our worship, but these chapters make an important point about all creative activity: it does not have to be explicitly wrong to be less than good. This begs the question: Does avoiding outright heresy make a song automatically and truly good? Does avoiding obvious immorality render a singer or organization good?

Or is there more to goodness than just avoiding badness? I am reminded of the prayer of confession, in which we entreat the Lord to forgive us “for what we have done and for what we have left undone.” Perhaps we have been looking at this debate from the wrong angle, trying to determine whether it is wrong to use music by Bethel and Hillsong. But maybe using their music is not a sin of commission (“what we have done”) but a matter of omission—of settling for what is “good enough” instead of seeking after what is “very good.”

It may not be wrong or sinful to use music by Bethel and Hillsong…but there is more to goodness than avoiding evil. That said, we need to ask not whether these songs are heretical but whether they are deeply truthful. Instead of just looking out for undeniable immorality, we need to ask whether singing these songs is truly sanctifying. Then, finally, we can examine the creative aspects of these songs, not to criticize but to honestly discern whether we are singing our very best for our very good King.