“People hear a song in church. They enjoy it. They search for it online. They discover the artist. Then they discover the church. Then they discover the pastor. Before long, they are listening to sermons, reading books, attending conferences, and absorbing an entire theological framework.”
(Aaron Alvarez – Reforming Worship) Years ago, I was leading the worship music at a small church. At the time, I regularly selected songs from Bethel Music. Like many worship leaders, I operated with a simple principle: if the lyrics of an individual song appeared biblical, then it was fair game for corporate worship.
One Sunday, we sang a Bethel song during the worship service. After the service ended, I stepped off the platform and began talking with people as they were leaving. A woman from the congregation approached me and asked a simple question:
“Who wrote that song we just sang?”
“It’s by Bethel Music,” I replied.
She thanked me and, while standing there in front of me, immediately pulled out her phone and looked them up. At the time, I thought nothing of it. Why would I? She was simply curious about a song she enjoyed. Several weeks later, that same woman approached me again. “I’ve been listening to Bethel’s pastor, Bill Johnson, on YouTube,” she said enthusiastically. “I’ve listened to quite a few of his sermons.” It was in that moment that something clicked.
I had never recommended Bill Johnson to her. I had never encouraged her to listen to Bethel Church. Yet through the music we were singing, I had unintentionally recommended that ministry. I hadn’t handed her a Bill Johnson book or suggested one of his sermons, but the song itself functioned as an introduction.
That experience forced me to think more carefully about the relationship between a song and its source. Music is never merely music. Songs introduce people to artists, ministries, churches, pastors, books, conferences, and entire theological systems. Whether we acknowledge it or not, the songs we platform in corporate worship often function as endorsements.
Many churches evaluate worship songs almost exclusively on the basis of the lyrics themselves. But should we ignore the source altogether?
I don’t believe we should.
Before discussing why the source matters, it is important to understand why many Christians have concerns about ministries such as Bethel, Elevation, and Hillsong:
Bethel Church in Redding, California, under the leadership of Bill Johnson, has become one of the most influential churches in the modern charismatic movement.
Some of the concerns raised by theologians and pastors include:
Practices associated with the New Apostolic Reformation movement.
A problematic teaching on the incarnation and the person of Christ (Kenosis/Nestorian tendencies).
A problematic view that says God is sovereign but not in control.
Various controversial teachings and prophetic claims that have failed or proven questionable.
Prosperity and Word of Faith theology.
Elevation Church, led by Steven Furtick, has drawn criticism for:
Man-centered preaching that frequently emphasizes personal success, potential, and self-fulfillment.
Statements that have been criticized as a form of modalism, a heretical view of the Trinity.
A ministry philosophy that often prioritizes attractional methods and branding.
Unbiblical statements such as “God broke the law for love.”
A consistent pattern of eisegesis (poor interpretive practices).
Hillsong’s influence around the world is undeniable. Yet concerns include:
Prosperity-oriented teaching among various Hillsong leaders.
Numerous leadership scandals and accountability failures.
Shallow theological content in much of its music catalog.
An emphasis on emotional experience that can overshadow doctrinal depth.
To be clear, the argument here is not about any specific song. The fact that these ministries have biblically sound songs actually makes the issue more complicated because truth mixed with error can make a ministry seem more trustworthy than it really is.
Not every song written by these ministries contains explicit heresy. The question is whether churches should actively promote ministries that are known for significant theological problems.
I believe the answer is no.
At this point, someone might object:
“But David committed grievous sins, and we still sing the Psalms. Doesn’t that prove that a songwriter’s personal life shouldn’t determine whether we sing their songs?”
I don’t believe the comparison works.
The issue is not whether someone has sinned, but whether they persist in teaching error and promoting it without repentance.
When David sinned with Bathsheba and orchestrated the death of Uriah, the prophet Nathan confronted him and David repented. Psalm 51 stands as a testimony to his repentance and brokenness before God.
The concerns surrounding Bethel, Elevation, and Hillsong are different. The issue is not a single failure followed by repentance. The concern is a continuing pattern of problematic teaching that remains publicly promoted and defended.
There is a significant difference between singing the inspired songs of a repentant believer and actively platforming ministries that continue to promote serious theological error. These are not equivalent situations.
Three Reasons Why This Whole issue Matters:
- The Music Functions as a Gateway.
If nobody sang songs from Bethel, Hillsong, or Elevation, very few Christians would know who these ministries are. Their music serves as a gateway.
People hear a song in church. They enjoy it. They search for it online. They discover the artist. Then they discover the church. Then they discover the pastor. Before long, they are listening to sermons, reading books, attending conferences, and absorbing an entire theological framework.
This is precisely what happened with the woman in my church.
The songs were not the destination. They were the introduction. When churches place these songs before their congregations every week, they inevitably function as a recommendation system. Whether intentional or not, congregants often interpret the use of a song as an endorsement of the ministry behind it.
- We Are Often Inconsistent.
A second problem is the inconsistency of the common argument.
Many people say:
“As long as the lyrics are biblical, the source doesn’t matter.”
At first glance, this sounds reasonable. But does anyone actually apply this principle consistently?
Suppose a Mormon songwriter wrote a song that contained no obvious theological errors. Would most evangelical churches sing it?
Suppose a Jehovah’s Witness produced a worship album with several songs that appeared biblical on the surface. Would churches place those songs into their regular rotation?
Suppose a Muslim organization wrote a song using biblical language about God. Would churches eagerly sing it on Sunday morning?
Most Christians would immediately object.
Why?
Because they intuitively recognize that the source matters.
Likewise, most churches would never invite a Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, or Muslim teacher into the pulpit and defend the decision by saying, “It’s only the content that matters.”
We understand that teachers, ministries, and institutions cannot be separated entirely from the material they produce.
If the source matters in preaching, teaching, conferences, books, and discipleship materials, why does it suddenly cease to matter when music is involved?
- Churches Financially Support These Ministries.
The third concern is often overlooked.
Most churches are required to pay for a CCLI license in order to legally display lyrics, print songs, and report song usage.
When churches report the use of copyrighted songs, royalties are distributed to the copyright holders.
In other words, when churches regularly sing songs from Bethel, Elevation, and Hillsong, money ultimately flows back to those ministries.
That money helps fund additional albums, conferences, books, marketing efforts, and ministry expansion.
This raises an important stewardship question:
Is it wise for churches to use money to support ministries they would never recommend from the pulpit?
If a church believes a ministry teaches serious error, why would it simultaneously contribute financially to that ministry’s growth and influence?
Some may argue that the amount of money involved is small, but the principle remains the same. Why should a church intentionally contribute even a small amount toward ministries it believes are spreading serious doctrinal error?
At this point, some might object, “But you give money to all kinds of businesses every day. Why is this any different?”
There is an important difference. When I buy groceries, pay my electric bill, or purchase products from companies I may disagree with, I am not financially supporting organizations that claim to be Christian ministries while teaching serious theological error. Those businesses are not functioning as churches, pastors, or discipleship ministries. They are simply providing goods or services.
Bethel, Elevation, and Hillsong are different. These organizations present themselves as Christian ministries. They produce sermons, conferences, books, discipleship resources, and worship music specifically designed to influence the church. When churches send money to these ministries through song royalties, they are not merely purchasing a product. They are helping fund organizations that are actively shaping the theology of Christians around the world.
The question is not whether every dollar we spend ends up in the hands of someone we disagree with. In a fallen world, that is unavoidable. The question is whether churches should intentionally support ministries they believe are teaching serious doctrinal error.
The issue is not merely musical preference. It is stewardship. Every dollar a church spends should advance truth, not error.
Conclusion:
The debate over Bethel, Hillsong, and Elevation is not merely about individual song lyrics. It is about influence.
A church that carefully guards its pulpit should also carefully guard its song selection. We should not evaluate songs only by asking, “Are these lyrics acceptable?” We should also ask, “What ministry are we platforming? What teachers are we promoting? Where will these songs lead our people?”
The songs we sing do not exist in a vacuum. They point somewhere. They introduce our people to pastors, churches, conferences, books, and theological systems.
The question is not merely whether a song contains true statements. The question is whether we want to direct God’s people toward the ministry behind it.
Posted on Facebook here where you contact Reforming Worship
Research: New Apostolic Reformation
CRN has compiled a list of false teachers and several other professing Christians we’ve warned you about over the years. The list also contains those we must keep an eye on plus movements, organizations and “frauds, phonies and money-grubbing religious quacks” to mark and avoid as per Romans 16:17-18 such as those mentioned in the article.
CRN publishes a wide range of views for research and study. Please keep in mind that the content of a post doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of CRN.
Join Marsha West on Facebook and MeWe
CRN publishes a wide range of views for research and study. Please keep in mind that the content of a post doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of CRN.