This 72 year old is here. I just listened to the song on another video. I had never heard it before and shared with others. God bless us as we approach another year. The LORD has blessed me greatly. 🙏 ♥ Of course, I know the tune but not the words. A friend texted and asked if I knew it. I'm so glad I looked it up.
It doesn't deserve to be liked more. It's an insult to Christ. Christ demands that we worship in spirit and in truth. Truth is perfection. When we sing, we must follow the guidelines of doing things properly. You love that boy's voice, whoever he is? Then you do not have the capacity to discern the difference between proper vocals and rubbish vocals. That means you lack discernment. Why do we allow our worst-educated vocalists to sing worship and praise music? Oh, you say you don't care? Seriously? Really? Then why not just have some kid out there with no vocal talent, somehow become a model for how we worship and praise the King of Kings? He's an anti-model. He doesn't know how to sing. That's an insult to the King of Kings. You approve of everying that boy is singing? You approve of all of the scenery of that video? Talk about a worldly video -- what is more worldly than a gold-laced carousel scene with some kid who is involved in some disgustingly failed attempt at singing properly?
This takes a song that has become an anthem of regret and hope for a new beginnings and replaces it with song of true hope and undeserved righteousness.
Should nothing of our efforts stand No legacy survive Unless the Lord does raise the house In vain its builders strive To you who boast tomorrow's gain Tell me, What is your life? A mist that vanishes at dawn All glory be to Christ! All glory be to Christ our king! All glory be to Christ! His rule and reign we'll ever sing All glory be to Christ! His will be done, His kingdom come On earth as is above Who is Himself our daily bread Praise Him, the Lord of love Let living water satisfy The thirsty without price We'll take a cup of kindness yet All glory be to Christ! All glory be to Christ our king! All glory be to Christ! His rule and reign we'll ever sing All glory be to Christ! When on the day the great I Am The faithful and the true The Lamb who was for sinners slain Is making all things new Behold our God shall live with us And be our steadfast light And we shall e'er his people be All glory be to Christ! All glory be to Christ our king! All glory be to Christ! His rule and reign we'll ever sing All glory be to Christ!
Sorry to be so off topic but does any of you know a trick to log back into an Instagram account..? I stupidly lost the password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me
@Dangelo Vihaan i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site on google and I'm waiting for the hacking stuff atm. Takes a while so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
Hello Jesus ❤ I want you to know you really have given me everything I have asked for and so much more. I want you to know you have made my life complete and more beautiful than I ever could have imagined. I want you all to know that I am eternally thankful for the sacrifices you make for each others sake. Jesus Christ I love you with all my heart my soul and my mind. I trust you 💯 percent. Everything is yours. It’s all for you.
And of course all the kiddies are standing around pouting with their arms crossed and looking up: "MOMMY WHEN ARE WE GONNA GET ON?!" Not to take away from the song, guys - good job.
With all due respect to "Kings Kaleidoscope" and the singer, I think it speaks to how sad and wrong today's CCM has become. I think there's a case to be made that there are elements in art such as this, that want to impose their own untrained, cutting-edge elements upon CCM (Contemporary Christian Music). Back in the late 1990s, I was starting to say, "Uh-oh," as I listened to certain superstars of the day really release some really poor-quality Christian music. But that has become the norm, with the newer generations. Any time that someone (anyone) should be singing properly -- and then doesn't -- I think it does damage to the hallmarks of Christian intellectuals and those who have been trained in things such as music theory. There is nowhere that I know of -- apart from today's most hip and most cutting-edge culture groups -- that proper teaching is to follow whatever that hippest, coolest, most cutting-edge, etc., at the expense of truth. And what's with the worldly scene? A carousel belongs at Disney World in Florida, going 'round and 'round and 'round endlessly, robotically, until it stops -- not with a video which claims to be in favor of Christ. But things like this have become the norm(s) with the latest generations. You name it: Casting Crowns insulting lyrics, Matt Redman insulting lyrics, it was clear from the late 1990's. -- Now, if I said that this production is "insulting to Christ", I want to distance myself from that statement, but I do want to say that form matters.
I can't tell if you're trolling, but as a fellow believer, I feel led to respond to this--and to your post elsewhere in this thread, which will be coming shortly--in a spirit of love. To clear the air, I'll say I came across this song a couple of years ago via a cover of it (The Petersens, which you should check out; it's more traditional than this video, and you might like it). I didn't know this band, and I didn't and don't consider myself a fan--haven't really listened to their other stuff. So I want to be open that I'm not rushing to defend anyone out of personal stake or "band loyalty." Instead, I mean to question where your sentiment comes from. While I agree the vocals in the recording aren't S-tier, they're still far better than many of us can muster. (I'd call his singing a solid A-tier, but you might disagree, and that's okay.) Some, such as myself, are barely capable of carrying the simplest of tunes. One could say it's not our God-given talent, no matter how much some of us try to improve. To that end, you've publicly insulted an artist who's just trying to perform a scripturally sound and much-beloved song--along with a whole host of us who lack even his level of talent. (And I call the song "scripturally sound and much-beloved" as a grump who much prefers traditional hymns, himself.) Moreover, your theological criticism about poor singing isn't scriptural, my friend. Nowhere in our scriptures does it say that singing poorly insults God, unless you mean to point to some anecdotal instance in which it wasn't poor singing but rather a motive behind poor singing (e.g., singing with a false spirit) that stoked the Lord's ire. (And I say this having read the entire scripture and done some work in theology.) Rather, it's the *spirit* behind the gesture that matters. God doesn't care whether someone's talented; he cares whether their heart's genuine and true in worship ("make a joyful noise," as the scripture says for one example). Doesn't really make much sense to encourage praise from your followers if all it's going to do is anger you that you didn't make them more talented. Where are you drawing your criticism from? I ask out of genuine curiosity. As regards the use of the carousel as a backdrop, that's immaterial. Remember John 4:19-23, in which Christ points out that in his new covenant, location will be a non-factor in worship. Carousel or cathedral, Disneyland or Notre Dame, it doesn't really matter as long as one's heart is faithful and right. However, if your concern is that the carousel trivializes the message by making it too "kiddy," I can see where you're coming from. That's a personal, artistic criticism, though, not a theological one--and it does little to undercut the message of the song. It'd fall more under the principles of liberty and brotherly consideration among the faithful as outlined in Romans 14. Finally, to your thoughts about "the latest generations," I do agree to a point. I admit I haven't listened to as much contemporary Christian music as most other Western believers (I struggle with its trading theology for trendiness and hypercommercialization), so I don't have a clear view of *all* the lyrics. As such, I stop short of calling them "insulting" across the board, which would be where I disagree here. However, I share your sentiment that contemporary songs have been trending in a subpar and, at times, theologically compromising direction. That's one of the reasons I was so pleasantly surprised to hear this song, because it's actually a good take on a traditional tune combined with a good message and a scriptural foundation. I'd like to lovingly encourage you to consider how those outside the faith might react if they see a believer's comment with a tone such as yours. As the scripture tells us, if they see us treating each other poorly, how are they to believe we love them and serve a God who loves them? That you have criticism is fair, but please, check the scripture and test the spirits before voicing it, then offer any rebuke with the spirit of firmness yet love that the scripture commands.
@@famousseamus1299 Apparently, you have accused me of not having anything in scripture as a basis for my criticism. When I hear something artificial, such as 1:11-1:12 in the video, I want to use the word "feigned". You might want to study what Scripture tells us about faking or feigning. Does Christ The Lord want us to ever feign anything? Consider the meaning of the word "feign". It might be defined (and has been, which I found) as pretending to be afflicted by emotion or state or injury. Does God want us to pretend anything? Does he want us to feign our faith? Every time I think about critiquing forces me to listen to him sing once again so that I can try to find the proper words to use and to tread lightly. So let's talk about the singer's "break" in voice at 1:11-1:12. It was around the mid-1990s when singers were starting to use the "break in the voice" of which approximately 1:11 in this video as an example. It's not proper. I was singing a contemporary Christian song back in 1997 and the recording engineer beckoned me to sing with a "break" in the voice. I think he did that because he wanted the song to become some sort of "cutting-edge" track, some "hip" track. He told me that on his Resume was a nationwide talk show in America; he recorded one of the show's main themes. My aim here is not to that particular recording engineer, but to point out what was being held up as the high standard by which other aspects of Christian music should be judged. With regards to contemporary Christian music (let's say beginning with Keith Green), Twila Paris didn't need to use a break, Keith Green didn't need to use it, Steve Green didn't need to use it, (unless you can show me otherwise), the Maranatha Singers from Calvary Chapel didn't need to use it, the Vineyard Singers didn't need to use it; the greatest of the great didn't need to use it, and we began to see a trend where (in America, at least) our worship leaders and our praise leaders were not only young, but seemingly the youngest of the young -- and as for form, not only not trained much in classical vocal form, but perhaps not even trained at all in vocals, let alone classical vocal style. I'm not surprised that this group originated from the Mars Hill church, because Mars Hill was one of those be-hip-at-all-costs, be-cutting-edge-at-all-costs fellowships. Suddenly, the worship and praise leaders in the church in America, at least, (but then around 1998 Hillsong seemed to explode onto the contemporary Christian music scene, and they've been based in Australia) there were more of a type of worship/praise songs that leaned heavily on.... I don't know quite what to call it, but norms that were taught by music teachers seemed to begin to be totally thrown out the window in favor of something else. I would suggest that you read essays and written works on hymns and spiritual songs by Pastor Scott Aniol and by Pastor Chris Ames, who has used the handle, at times, "chriswhodontsing". They're both pastors, they're both experienced in worship and praise, they're both very well familiar with Scripture, and they both have a lot of experience. The "break in the voice" is something really very artificial, and is definitely not something that worship/praise music teachers should be teaching. It's what I term as feigning. Why, all of a sudden, in about two thousand years of Christendom, do I not know of any thing of the sort that has been on the rise since, say, at least the late 1990s. We've traded more meaning in favor of more emotion and less meaning. If you look into the Scriptures, which do you think is more important? More in terms of meaning? Or less meaning with -- instead -- more emotion? Also, you said that "it doesn't really matter as long as one's heart is faithful and right." As Scott Anoil has asked, (if I can try to paraphrase him as accurately as I can), we can go with our hearts, but our hearts are not always right. I remember someone saying similar to: "Other things don't matter, as long as our hearts are right". Pastor Aniol responded that our hearts are sometimes wrong. In Scripture, we have the story of Uzzah, in the Bible, was an Israelite who had good motives (he wanted to please God) but that Uzzah went about it in the wrong way regarding God's Ark Of The Covenant. And for that, God killed him. Right then and there. God's anger burned and God killed him right there. But back to the word "feign", which is associated with being false. Let us do a word study on "feign" or "false" or "falsity" in the context of Scripture. When does God ever want us to be false? He doesn't. Or does he? You tell me. Does God deceive? Really? Where? And any movement to make *everything* cutting edge, to make *everything* hip and flashy as possible -- at the expense of other things such as meaning -- that's not good. Now I don't know these guys, "Kings Kaleidoscope", whoever they are, apparently from Mars Hill, (which doesn't matter), there is nowhere that I'm aware of in Scripture that tells us that we are "Kings". And then, as for anyone else, there is only one (1) King, and that is Christ Jesus the Lord. Now, several centuries ago in England, there were men who were called "King" or "Lord", such as "Lord" Byron, whom people still refer to in literature as "Lord" Byron. I don't like using that term for Byron, even though he might have had some admirable qualities. Why not? Because there is only one Lord. As for the Carousel, it's really very distracting and we know things that go 'round and 'round and 'round don't get anywhere, in the end. Is that, as believers, what we want to do? Just go around in a circle the whole night? (or the whole day, whatever time it might be?) So back to "Kings Kaleidoscope". Beg your pardon? "Kings"? Seriously? Do they really think that they -- or we -- are "kings"? How is that scriptural? Now, as to your protest, are you trying to suggest that we always keep our mouths silent when it comes to what other Christians are doing? Did the great theologian, Martin Luther, do that? Of course not. He nailed his 95 theses to the wall, so that people might see, right there at the door, how he believed that the Catholic (with a capital c) church was in error (whether you want to use a lower-case e or capital E; if we're writing in the style of Edmund Spenser or other English writers, we might use a Capital E.)
@@proofreader8000_ Oh, hey there. Hope you're doing well. I completely forgot we were having this conversation. Thanks for the thoughtful reply and the further explanation. This helps a lot. It looks like my reply to your other comment elsewhere in the comments thread got eaten by cyberspace, which is unfortunate (thing took like an hour to type), but it's okay; you bring up a couple of the same points here. So, to take things from the top, I do want to be clear my intention wasn't to accuse you of anything. Rather, it was to encourage with some gentleness to be less harsh and insulting in your criticisms, which--I see--are coming from a good place with good intentions. I respect that you wanted to call out things that are wrong; I just noticed issues with your basis and your execution. That's what I was trying to point out. Like I said, that you have criticisms is valid, but there's no need to be mean about it (and one can be firm without being mean, as one of your clear education certainly knows). On to the rest. Let's start with "feign." First, as a fellow word and language enthusiast, I appreciate your dive into the lexicon. More importantly, however, I do agree with you that it's crucial to be genuine in worship and all that one does walking in the faith. God clearly doesn't appreciate anything done in falsehood. (As Hebrews points out, there's no falseness in him, and he's incapable of lying.) However, I think we may have to disagree (per Romans 14) on the consequentiality of the break in the voice you’ve pointed out. Obviously, such an act is fabricated. If you believe that it’s an affront to God, it isn’t really my place to stop you (although once again, I’d like to reiterate you needn’t be mean as you express your concerns over it). Having said that, I’m not certain it’s as consequential as you argue that it is, the reason being it’s an artistic choice. Now, before we start going back and forth over art and its inherent virtues as it relates to God, etc. etc., it’s important to acknowledge that *all* music is fabricated, even the most beloved old hymns. Those hymns were predated by older poems and hymns, themselves predated by earlier chamber music and such, those by Gregorian chants and similar liturgical music, those by the formative hymns of the early Church, and on and on. They’ve all got vastly different styles, chords, and tones. Which of them is right, and which is wrong? God inspires all art, but it’s rare indeed that he ordains it directly. To that end, a break in the voice is less like putting a rock through a stained-glass window and more like changing the color of one of the panes. Does it look different? Sure. Is it to everyone’s liking? No. But does it dramatically change the meaning or intrinsic message of the window? Not really. So while I see where you’re coming from . . . I dunno, *eh*? I do appreciate your zeal on the subject, however, and as I indicated above, I very much agree that a lot of contemporary music trades in substance for flashiness and hipness. I also agree that a lot of the more modern music sacrifices meaning for emotion: one doesn’t have to look far at all to see that. I likewise appreciate your pointing to these essays. I’ll try to track them down when I have a chance. So, then, on to the subjects of the heart, meaning, and emotion. I take your point about the importance of meaning versus emotion, although I think “versus” is a false dichotomy. One isn’t more important than the other: they’re two inseparable sides of the same coin. Worship is founded in meaning and lived via emotion--again, as the scripture says, “spirit *and* truth,” emphasis mine; metaphorically speaking, the spirit is the emotion, and the truth is the meaning. As it relates to this present song, you haven’t actually raised a single qualm about the scriptural validity of the lyrics but rather the way in which they’re sung. If that’s the case, we’re fretting over the emotion, which in light of it being an artistic choice and art being entirely man-made (blah, blah, and so on), again seems more like a liturgical concern and less like a theological one--although, again, I don’t fault you for seeing matters as you do. That’s your right, and if seeing them otherwise would cause you to stumble, then don’t see them otherwise. The example of Uzzah is a poignant one, but it’s unfair to argue that his heart was wrong, because the entire processing bearing the Ark was wrong from start to finish. Neither Uzzah nor Ahio were Levites and shouldn’t have been helping to bear the Ark, and the Ark shouldn’t have been on a cart. His entire presence in the procession was wrong, so we can’t point to his death and say “his heart was wrong in the moment he steadied the Ark” as if that was the defining thing that got him killed. One could argue, “Uzzah’s heart was wrong in joining the procession,” but we don’t actually know specifically why he was in the procession, so we can’t say this. Using his heart as an example doesn’t hold up. As to the larger point about our hearts sometimes being wrong, sure--that’s true. But now we must ask whether the break in the voice you reference was made out of vanity or some other malfeasance. (I say we must ask this question because, as I’ve noted above, music history would fundamentally disagree that a break in the voice is inherently evil.) Assuming we can even answer the question, if it were, I’d jump to agree with you that it’s inappropriate. If it weren’t--and this seems the more likely option--I maintain my disagreement but continue to respect your position. Jumping down to your final stylistic questions. I looked up the history behind the name “Kings Kaleidoscope” because you got me curious. (TH-cam isn’t letting me insert a link, alas, but do a bit of Googling and you’ll find some interviews on it.) It was on the band’s shortlist of potential names, suggested off the cuff by a friend, and got picked because the group felt all the other names were lame or too silly. I’d posit that “Kings” is a typo with a missing apostrophe (a la “Kaleidoscope of the King”), probably introduced early on by accident. We can argue about it until we’re blue in the face, but it certainly doesn’t seem like an intentional effort to usurp God’s regality. As to whether the use of “king,” “lord,” etc. for temporal purposes is sinful, I’ve got to disagree with you once again. Even the apostle Paul acknowledged Agrippa as “King Agrippa” in his oration before him (Acts 26) and Caesar (likely Caligula, Claudius, or Nero) as “Caesar” in his defense before Porcius Festus (Acts 25) (“Caesar” at the time was an honorific title bestowed on all rulers of the Roman Principate). Even Jesus acknowledged Tiberius Caesar by the title of “Caesar” (Mark 12). Scripturally speaking, the issue isn’t whether the title is used but rather whether the speaker reveres the holder of the title more than they revere God. One can say “King Charles” without putting him over God in one’s heart, because “King” is his job title or identifier. The same would go for Lord Byron, where “Lord Byron” (his real name was George Gordon) is just a social identifier. It goes back to meaning and emotion, both of which can be divorced from the actual word used. Regarding the carousel, as I pointed out in my first post, your criticism there is your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. I actually admire the literary perspective you take on seeing it as an infinite spiral that goes nowhere. Conversely, one could equally legitimately make the case that the carousel’s “infinite spin” represents the never-ending glory of Christ, etc. etc. As with any literary interpretations, we’d have fun arguing it but ultimately be making a mountain out of a molehill when the world has *so* many more important things to be addressing at the moment. Finally, to your thoughts on my protest and whether we should keep silent, of course I don’t think we should. If I did, I wouldn’t have spoken to you. I didn’t say that you should, either; I said that you should consider offering your criticisms with more gentleness when it’s warranted, given that all the world and all those outside the faith can see whatever you put on a platform like TH-cam. To put it directly: We don’t need to be jerks. The world is watching, and the faith doesn’t need to look bad because people pop off without tempering their words with a measure of grace. We see this principle throughout the New Testament: Jesus, the apostles, and the early evangelists responded as the situation demanded. Those who came with good intentions received a disciplined and graceful reply. Those who came with poor intentions received a more zealous and stinging rebuke. The message must always be true but should likewise always be delivered in a way and with a measure of grace as the situation demands. And, my brother in Christ, this is a music video with scriptural lyrics, so a harsh and condescending response is uncalled for. That’s what I was trying to say.
New Years Eve 2024...who's still here?!
“Tell me, what is your life? A mist that vanishes at dawn.”
This strangely hurts and comforts at the same time
This 72 year old is here. I just listened to the song on another video.
I had never heard it before and shared with others. God bless us as we approach another year. The LORD has blessed me greatly. 🙏 ♥
Of course, I know the tune but not the words. A friend texted and asked if I knew it. I'm so glad I looked it up.
This YT video includes the lyrics. Happy New Year!✝️ th-cam.com/video/2Tcx81LsmoA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=shsPpxsa27avv55M
I love this song. My late dad would always play it for us on new years right at 12 it will forever be in my heart happy 2024!!!
HAPPY 2025!!!
Still proclaiming this in 2024!
We do not deserve to have The Holy Spirit here with us but He is the faithful and the true.
Is this my favorite song at the moment? Why yes it is. By at the moment I mean the past five years.
🎉2025🎉 Jubilee with Jesus
It saddens me that this isn’t liked more. ALL GLORY TO CHRIST THE KING OF KINGS.
What do you mean
We sing it at our church ,beautiful version of auld Lang zine
It doesn't deserve to be liked more. It's an insult to Christ. Christ demands that we worship in spirit and in truth. Truth is perfection. When we sing, we must follow the guidelines of doing things properly. You love that boy's voice, whoever he is? Then you do not have the capacity to discern the difference between proper vocals and rubbish vocals. That means you lack discernment. Why do we allow our worst-educated vocalists to sing worship and praise music? Oh, you say you don't care? Seriously? Really? Then why not just have some kid out there with no vocal talent, somehow become a model for how we worship and praise the King of Kings? He's an anti-model. He doesn't know how to sing. That's an insult to the King of Kings. You approve of everying that boy is singing? You approve of all of the scenery of that video? Talk about a worldly video -- what is more worldly than a gold-laced carousel scene with some kid who is involved in some disgustingly failed attempt at singing properly?
Hallelujah brother! Hallelujah! All Glory be to Christ!
This takes a song that has become an anthem of regret and hope for a new beginnings and replaces it with song of true hope and undeserved righteousness.
The main part of the chorus is my senior quote, one of the best songs that I have ever heard!!!!!!
I'll adopt it as my quite too when I graduate from grad school
This is definitely on the short list of songs we have to sing him when he gets back.
Should nothing of our efforts stand
No legacy survive
Unless the Lord does raise the house
In vain its builders strive
To you who boast tomorrow's gain
Tell me, What is your life?
A mist that vanishes at dawn
All glory be to Christ!
All glory be to Christ our king!
All glory be to Christ!
His rule and reign we'll ever sing
All glory be to Christ!
His will be done, His kingdom come
On earth as is above
Who is Himself our daily bread
Praise Him, the Lord of love
Let living water satisfy
The thirsty without price
We'll take a cup of kindness yet
All glory be to Christ!
All glory be to Christ our king!
All glory be to Christ!
His rule and reign we'll ever sing
All glory be to Christ!
When on the day the great I Am
The faithful and the true
The Lamb who was for sinners slain
Is making all things new
Behold our God shall live with us
And be our steadfast light
And we shall e'er his people be
All glory be to Christ!
All glory be to Christ our king!
All glory be to Christ!
His rule and reign we'll ever sing
All glory be to Christ!
Sorry to be so off topic but does any of you know a trick to log back into an Instagram account..?
I stupidly lost the password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me
@Tommy Ben instablaster =)
@Dangelo Vihaan i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site on google and I'm waiting for the hacking stuff atm.
Takes a while so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Dangelo Vihaan it worked and I finally got access to my account again. I'm so happy!
Thank you so much you saved my ass!
@Tommy Ben No problem =)
All Glory be to CHRIST!! AMEN 🙏
This is my favorite version of this song. Your guys' faithfulness over all these years has been incredibly inspiring. All glory be to Christ!
I Really Like The Carousel, It Makes Me Wanna Ride It
This is awesome, thanks to my grandson for sharing.
Happy New Year! 2025. Bring it on!
Have God set on your mind for 2025 and the rest of your life ✝️
Omg I just came across you by following saint Andrews Hall Detroit! I can't wait. Instantly love you guys❤
se echa de menos la sencillez de este tipo de melodía, y de su letra tan fiel a la Biblia. "OLD SCHOOL RULES!"
Hello Jesus ❤ I want you to know you really have given me everything I have asked for and so much more. I want you to know you have made my life complete and more beautiful than I ever could have imagined. I want you all to know that I am eternally thankful for the sacrifices you make for each others sake. Jesus Christ I love you with all my heart my soul and my mind. I trust you 💯 percent. Everything is yours. It’s all for you.
AMEN!
I haven't heard this song in years... my all time favorite hymn
All Glory and honor to the Most High God, for He Reigns forever and ever,❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
this song needs more views, it's been on loop for weeks!!
Happy New Year! All Gory Be To Christ!
this deserves WAY more attention
Los escucho desde Argentina, admiro y disfruto muchísimo su música!
All Glory to Christ our King!! ♥️
heard this for the first time just yesterday ... wonderful worship thoughts ... so glad for this gift
HIGH TIME TO BE IN THE PUBLIC SQUARES PROFESSING HIS KINGDOM AND SONSHIP!!
Amen!! All glory be to Christ 🙌🏻
Yes and amen!
All Glory be to Jesus Christ
Wonderful! I will be singing along with this a lot over Christmas!
Best song praise be to the king Jesus All glory be to Christ 🙏♥️
Happy 2024 🎉
This song is soooo great and brings to tears to my eyes!!!!!!
Gloria a Cristo!!! Saludos desde México,Dios los bendiga
So beautiful!! Thank you!
this is such a unique idea to film! I love KK's magic!
Thank you jesus
Wow! Such an amazing song sung with so much heart.
This was very nice. I'm glad my friend shared it with me.
Love this song and great video, but love Christ even more. I looked this up because we sang this song out our church today.
T.T all glory be to Christ our King!!
And of course all the kiddies are standing around pouting with their arms crossed and looking up: "MOMMY WHEN ARE WE GONNA GET ON?!"
Not to take away from the song, guys - good job.
Happy new year everyone!!!
Happy new year’s 2022
would love for you guys to come to Dallas!
This brings us such joy!! 💛💛💛✝️
This is amazing !
absolutely amazing, keep the great music coming, God Bless brothers and sisters.
Beautiful ♥️
Still soooo good
Wow, so beautiful ❤ ✝️
The gates of hell will not prevail against Christ the King nor His bride, the Church.
Awesome! Glory be to God!❤
Absolutely love this.
Love this!!!
Beautiful.
great job!
+Kyle S agreed
Amen
Love it
LETSSSSS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Very nice
Beautiful
All glory be to Christ in 2025/ eternity
I love this song.
And .... he’s very attractive . ☺️
Heavily inspired by Rabindranath Tagore's song "purano sei diner kotha"
Why the carousel?
Now you see me
Why is this song played on New Year’s?
🙌🏻🕊️💗
✨
vertigo
6 People boasted about tomorrow's gain.
13 people
@@nightwing-scp4268 what does this mean, I’m sorry I’m lost.
@@Dani4B the song says that you shouldn’t boast about tomorrow’s gain, and the people who did don’t like that so they disliked
@@nightwing-scp4268 OOOO
@@nightwing-scp4268 good old times with dislike button
I know why God likes people -- because of Chad Gardner singer songwriter.
matthew roldan hi old
Something about this video looks like it was captured in Unreal Engine lol
めちゃくちゃほたるの光だ笑笑笑笑
isn't it
:D
With all due respect to "Kings Kaleidoscope" and the singer, I think it speaks to how sad and wrong today's CCM has become. I think there's a case to be made that there are elements in art such as this, that want to impose their own untrained, cutting-edge elements upon CCM (Contemporary Christian Music). Back in the late 1990s, I was starting to say, "Uh-oh," as I listened to certain superstars of the day really release some really poor-quality Christian music. But that has become the norm, with the newer generations. Any time that someone (anyone) should be singing properly -- and then doesn't -- I think it does damage to the hallmarks of Christian intellectuals and those who have been trained in things such as music theory. There is nowhere that I know of -- apart from today's most hip and most cutting-edge culture groups -- that proper teaching is to follow whatever that hippest, coolest, most cutting-edge, etc., at the expense of truth. And what's with the worldly scene? A carousel belongs at Disney World in Florida, going 'round and 'round and 'round endlessly, robotically, until it stops -- not with a video which claims to be in favor of Christ. But things like this have become the norm(s) with the latest generations. You name it: Casting Crowns insulting lyrics, Matt Redman insulting lyrics, it was clear from the late 1990's. -- Now, if I said that this production is "insulting to Christ", I want to distance myself from that statement, but I do want to say that form matters.
I can't tell if you're trolling, but as a fellow believer, I feel led to respond to this--and to your post elsewhere in this thread, which will be coming shortly--in a spirit of love.
To clear the air, I'll say I came across this song a couple of years ago via a cover of it (The Petersens, which you should check out; it's more traditional than this video, and you might like it). I didn't know this band, and I didn't and don't consider myself a fan--haven't really listened to their other stuff. So I want to be open that I'm not rushing to defend anyone out of personal stake or "band loyalty."
Instead, I mean to question where your sentiment comes from. While I agree the vocals in the recording aren't S-tier, they're still far better than many of us can muster. (I'd call his singing a solid A-tier, but you might disagree, and that's okay.) Some, such as myself, are barely capable of carrying the simplest of tunes. One could say it's not our God-given talent, no matter how much some of us try to improve. To that end, you've publicly insulted an artist who's just trying to perform a scripturally sound and much-beloved song--along with a whole host of us who lack even his level of talent. (And I call the song "scripturally sound and much-beloved" as a grump who much prefers traditional hymns, himself.)
Moreover, your theological criticism about poor singing isn't scriptural, my friend. Nowhere in our scriptures does it say that singing poorly insults God, unless you mean to point to some anecdotal instance in which it wasn't poor singing but rather a motive behind poor singing (e.g., singing with a false spirit) that stoked the Lord's ire. (And I say this having read the entire scripture and done some work in theology.) Rather, it's the *spirit* behind the gesture that matters. God doesn't care whether someone's talented; he cares whether their heart's genuine and true in worship ("make a joyful noise," as the scripture says for one example). Doesn't really make much sense to encourage praise from your followers if all it's going to do is anger you that you didn't make them more talented. Where are you drawing your criticism from? I ask out of genuine curiosity.
As regards the use of the carousel as a backdrop, that's immaterial. Remember John 4:19-23, in which Christ points out that in his new covenant, location will be a non-factor in worship. Carousel or cathedral, Disneyland or Notre Dame, it doesn't really matter as long as one's heart is faithful and right. However, if your concern is that the carousel trivializes the message by making it too "kiddy," I can see where you're coming from. That's a personal, artistic criticism, though, not a theological one--and it does little to undercut the message of the song. It'd fall more under the principles of liberty and brotherly consideration among the faithful as outlined in Romans 14.
Finally, to your thoughts about "the latest generations," I do agree to a point. I admit I haven't listened to as much contemporary Christian music as most other Western believers (I struggle with its trading theology for trendiness and hypercommercialization), so I don't have a clear view of *all* the lyrics. As such, I stop short of calling them "insulting" across the board, which would be where I disagree here. However, I share your sentiment that contemporary songs have been trending in a subpar and, at times, theologically compromising direction. That's one of the reasons I was so pleasantly surprised to hear this song, because it's actually a good take on a traditional tune combined with a good message and a scriptural foundation.
I'd like to lovingly encourage you to consider how those outside the faith might react if they see a believer's comment with a tone such as yours. As the scripture tells us, if they see us treating each other poorly, how are they to believe we love them and serve a God who loves them? That you have criticism is fair, but please, check the scripture and test the spirits before voicing it, then offer any rebuke with the spirit of firmness yet love that the scripture commands.
@@famousseamus1299 Apparently, you have accused me of not having anything in scripture as a basis for my criticism. When I hear something artificial, such as 1:11-1:12 in the video, I want to use the word "feigned". You might want to study what Scripture tells us about faking or feigning. Does Christ The Lord want us to ever feign anything? Consider the meaning of the word "feign". It might be defined (and has been, which I found) as pretending to be afflicted by emotion or state or injury. Does God want us to pretend anything? Does he want us to feign our faith? Every time I think about critiquing forces me to listen to him sing once again so that I can try to find the proper words to use and to tread lightly. So let's talk about the singer's "break" in voice at 1:11-1:12. It was around the mid-1990s when singers were starting to use the "break in the voice" of which approximately 1:11 in this video as an example. It's not proper. I was singing a contemporary Christian song back in 1997 and the recording engineer beckoned me to sing with a "break" in the voice. I think he did that because he wanted the song to become some sort of "cutting-edge" track, some "hip" track. He told me that on his Resume was a nationwide talk show in America; he recorded one of the show's main themes. My aim here is not to that particular recording engineer, but to point out what was being held up as the high standard by which other aspects of Christian music should be judged. With regards to contemporary Christian music (let's say beginning with Keith Green), Twila Paris didn't need to use a break, Keith Green didn't need to use it, Steve Green didn't need to use it, (unless you can show me otherwise), the Maranatha Singers from Calvary Chapel didn't need to use it, the Vineyard Singers didn't need to use it; the greatest of the great didn't need to use it, and we began to see a trend where (in America, at least) our worship leaders and our praise leaders were not only young, but seemingly the youngest of the young -- and as for form, not only not trained much in classical vocal form, but perhaps not even trained at all in vocals, let alone classical vocal style. I'm not surprised that this group originated from the Mars Hill church, because Mars Hill was one of those be-hip-at-all-costs, be-cutting-edge-at-all-costs fellowships. Suddenly, the worship and praise leaders in the church in America, at least, (but then around 1998 Hillsong seemed to explode onto the contemporary Christian music scene, and they've been based in Australia) there were more of a type of worship/praise songs that leaned heavily on.... I don't know quite what to call it, but norms that were taught by music teachers seemed to begin to be totally thrown out the window in favor of something else. I would suggest that you read essays and written works on hymns and spiritual songs by Pastor Scott Aniol and by Pastor Chris Ames, who has used the handle, at times, "chriswhodontsing". They're both pastors, they're both experienced in worship and praise, they're both very well familiar with Scripture, and they both have a lot of experience. The "break in the voice" is something really very artificial, and is definitely not something that worship/praise music teachers should be teaching. It's what I term as feigning. Why, all of a sudden, in about two thousand years of Christendom, do I not know of any thing of the sort that has been on the rise since, say, at least the late 1990s. We've traded more meaning in favor of more emotion and less meaning. If you look into the Scriptures, which do you think is more important? More in terms of meaning? Or less meaning with -- instead -- more emotion? Also, you said that "it doesn't really matter as long as one's heart is faithful and right." As Scott Anoil has asked, (if I can try to paraphrase him as accurately as I can), we can go with our hearts, but our hearts are not always right. I remember someone saying similar to: "Other things don't matter, as long as our hearts are right". Pastor Aniol responded that our hearts are sometimes wrong. In Scripture, we have the story of Uzzah, in the Bible, was an Israelite who had good motives (he wanted to please God) but that Uzzah went about it in the wrong way regarding God's Ark Of The Covenant. And for that, God killed him. Right then and there. God's anger burned and God killed him right there. But back to the word "feign", which is associated with being false. Let us do a word study on "feign" or "false" or "falsity" in the context of Scripture. When does God ever want us to be false? He doesn't. Or does he? You tell me. Does God deceive? Really? Where? And any movement to make *everything* cutting edge, to make *everything* hip and flashy as possible -- at the expense of other things such as meaning -- that's not good. Now I don't know these guys, "Kings Kaleidoscope", whoever they are, apparently from Mars Hill, (which doesn't matter), there is nowhere that I'm aware of in Scripture that tells us that we are "Kings". And then, as for anyone else, there is only one (1) King, and that is Christ Jesus the Lord. Now, several centuries ago in England, there were men who were called "King" or "Lord", such as "Lord" Byron, whom people still refer to in literature as "Lord" Byron. I don't like using that term for Byron, even though he might have had some admirable qualities. Why not? Because there is only one Lord. As for the Carousel, it's really very distracting and we know things that go 'round and 'round and 'round don't get anywhere, in the end. Is that, as believers, what we want to do? Just go around in a circle the whole night? (or the whole day, whatever time it might be?) So back to "Kings Kaleidoscope". Beg your pardon? "Kings"? Seriously? Do they really think that they -- or we -- are "kings"? How is that scriptural? Now, as to your protest, are you trying to suggest that we always keep our mouths silent when it comes to what other Christians are doing? Did the great theologian, Martin Luther, do that? Of course not. He nailed his 95 theses to the wall, so that people might see, right there at the door, how he believed that the Catholic (with a capital c) church was in error (whether you want to use a lower-case e or capital E; if we're writing in the style of Edmund Spenser or other English writers, we might use a Capital E.)
@@proofreader8000_ Oh, hey there. Hope you're doing well. I completely forgot we were having this conversation. Thanks for the thoughtful reply and the further explanation. This helps a lot. It looks like my reply to your other comment elsewhere in the comments thread got eaten by cyberspace, which is unfortunate (thing took like an hour to type), but it's okay; you bring up a couple of the same points here.
So, to take things from the top, I do want to be clear my intention wasn't to accuse you of anything. Rather, it was to encourage with some gentleness to be less harsh and insulting in your criticisms, which--I see--are coming from a good place with good intentions. I respect that you wanted to call out things that are wrong; I just noticed issues with your basis and your execution. That's what I was trying to point out. Like I said, that you have criticisms is valid, but there's no need to be mean about it (and one can be firm without being mean, as one of your clear education certainly knows).
On to the rest. Let's start with "feign." First, as a fellow word and language enthusiast, I appreciate your dive into the lexicon. More importantly, however, I do agree with you that it's crucial to be genuine in worship and all that one does walking in the faith. God clearly doesn't appreciate anything done in falsehood. (As Hebrews points out, there's no falseness in him, and he's incapable of lying.)
However, I think we may have to disagree (per Romans 14) on the consequentiality of the break in the voice you’ve pointed out. Obviously, such an act is fabricated. If you believe that it’s an affront to God, it isn’t really my place to stop you (although once again, I’d like to reiterate you needn’t be mean as you express your concerns over it). Having said that, I’m not certain it’s as consequential as you argue that it is, the reason being it’s an artistic choice. Now, before we start going back and forth over art and its inherent virtues as it relates to God, etc. etc., it’s important to acknowledge that *all* music is fabricated, even the most beloved old hymns. Those hymns were predated by older poems and hymns, themselves predated by earlier chamber music and such, those by Gregorian chants and similar liturgical music, those by the formative hymns of the early Church, and on and on. They’ve all got vastly different styles, chords, and tones. Which of them is right, and which is wrong? God inspires all art, but it’s rare indeed that he ordains it directly. To that end, a break in the voice is less like putting a rock through a stained-glass window and more like changing the color of one of the panes. Does it look different? Sure. Is it to everyone’s liking? No. But does it dramatically change the meaning or intrinsic message of the window? Not really. So while I see where you’re coming from . . . I dunno, *eh*?
I do appreciate your zeal on the subject, however, and as I indicated above, I very much agree that a lot of contemporary music trades in substance for flashiness and hipness. I also agree that a lot of the more modern music sacrifices meaning for emotion: one doesn’t have to look far at all to see that. I likewise appreciate your pointing to these essays. I’ll try to track them down when I have a chance.
So, then, on to the subjects of the heart, meaning, and emotion. I take your point about the importance of meaning versus emotion, although I think “versus” is a false dichotomy. One isn’t more important than the other: they’re two inseparable sides of the same coin. Worship is founded in meaning and lived via emotion--again, as the scripture says, “spirit *and* truth,” emphasis mine; metaphorically speaking, the spirit is the emotion, and the truth is the meaning. As it relates to this present song, you haven’t actually raised a single qualm about the scriptural validity of the lyrics but rather the way in which they’re sung. If that’s the case, we’re fretting over the emotion, which in light of it being an artistic choice and art being entirely man-made (blah, blah, and so on), again seems more like a liturgical concern and less like a theological one--although, again, I don’t fault you for seeing matters as you do. That’s your right, and if seeing them otherwise would cause you to stumble, then don’t see them otherwise.
The example of Uzzah is a poignant one, but it’s unfair to argue that his heart was wrong, because the entire processing bearing the Ark was wrong from start to finish. Neither Uzzah nor Ahio were Levites and shouldn’t have been helping to bear the Ark, and the Ark shouldn’t have been on a cart. His entire presence in the procession was wrong, so we can’t point to his death and say “his heart was wrong in the moment he steadied the Ark” as if that was the defining thing that got him killed. One could argue, “Uzzah’s heart was wrong in joining the procession,” but we don’t actually know specifically why he was in the procession, so we can’t say this. Using his heart as an example doesn’t hold up.
As to the larger point about our hearts sometimes being wrong, sure--that’s true. But now we must ask whether the break in the voice you reference was made out of vanity or some other malfeasance. (I say we must ask this question because, as I’ve noted above, music history would fundamentally disagree that a break in the voice is inherently evil.) Assuming we can even answer the question, if it were, I’d jump to agree with you that it’s inappropriate. If it weren’t--and this seems the more likely option--I maintain my disagreement but continue to respect your position.
Jumping down to your final stylistic questions. I looked up the history behind the name “Kings Kaleidoscope” because you got me curious. (TH-cam isn’t letting me insert a link, alas, but do a bit of Googling and you’ll find some interviews on it.) It was on the band’s shortlist of potential names, suggested off the cuff by a friend, and got picked because the group felt all the other names were lame or too silly. I’d posit that “Kings” is a typo with a missing apostrophe (a la “Kaleidoscope of the King”), probably introduced early on by accident. We can argue about it until we’re blue in the face, but it certainly doesn’t seem like an intentional effort to usurp God’s regality.
As to whether the use of “king,” “lord,” etc. for temporal purposes is sinful, I’ve got to disagree with you once again. Even the apostle Paul acknowledged Agrippa as “King Agrippa” in his oration before him (Acts 26) and Caesar (likely Caligula, Claudius, or Nero) as “Caesar” in his defense before Porcius Festus (Acts 25) (“Caesar” at the time was an honorific title bestowed on all rulers of the Roman Principate). Even Jesus acknowledged Tiberius Caesar by the title of “Caesar” (Mark 12). Scripturally speaking, the issue isn’t whether the title is used but rather whether the speaker reveres the holder of the title more than they revere God. One can say “King Charles” without putting him over God in one’s heart, because “King” is his job title or identifier. The same would go for Lord Byron, where “Lord Byron” (his real name was George Gordon) is just a social identifier. It goes back to meaning and emotion, both of which can be divorced from the actual word used.
Regarding the carousel, as I pointed out in my first post, your criticism there is your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. I actually admire the literary perspective you take on seeing it as an infinite spiral that goes nowhere. Conversely, one could equally legitimately make the case that the carousel’s “infinite spin” represents the never-ending glory of Christ, etc. etc. As with any literary interpretations, we’d have fun arguing it but ultimately be making a mountain out of a molehill when the world has *so* many more important things to be addressing at the moment.
Finally, to your thoughts on my protest and whether we should keep silent, of course I don’t think we should. If I did, I wouldn’t have spoken to you. I didn’t say that you should, either; I said that you should consider offering your criticisms with more gentleness when it’s warranted, given that all the world and all those outside the faith can see whatever you put on a platform like TH-cam. To put it directly: We don’t need to be jerks. The world is watching, and the faith doesn’t need to look bad because people pop off without tempering their words with a measure of grace. We see this principle throughout the New Testament: Jesus, the apostles, and the early evangelists responded as the situation demanded. Those who came with good intentions received a disciplined and graceful reply. Those who came with poor intentions received a more zealous and stinging rebuke. The message must always be true but should likewise always be delivered in a way and with a measure of grace as the situation demands. And, my brother in Christ, this is a music video with scriptural lyrics, so a harsh and condescending response is uncalled for. That’s what I was trying to say.