Re: Why don't more Christian metal bands write songs like this?

by d@v!d Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:59 am

Gandalf the White wrote:
d@v!d wrote:
Gandalf the White wrote:How do you filter a band you disagree with very heavily? For instance, I know you are of the Reformed camp - what would you do about a band like Showbread that sings (a lot) about openness ideas? Would you still listen to them, assuming you like the style of the music?
With a lot of wincing usually. If I really like what they are doing instrumentally, then I might pretend that the words mean something different or I might lower the volume or make a distracting noise to skip through a particularly bad lyric line.

I'm totally unfamiliar with Showbread, but I gave the example of Iahweh. They sing some things that I find to be shallow or just nonsensical. I can stand to listen to musicians whose messages I disagree with, but I long for better.
I'm not trying to argue here - I just want to know how others view this kind of thing.
I hope that I don't give the impression that I'm so unapproachable. I strive for transparency and diplomacy.
My wife doesn't understand how I can listen to some secular music when I disagree with some of their beliefs but I won't listen to an artist that is vocally Reformed in their theology.
Yes, that does seem a bit inconsistent on the surface, but I think it's just telling of where your passions are. You despise reformed theology more than secularism. Einfach. I think it's fine to know what you will or will not tolerate. I understand the difficulties that people have with reformed theology as I struggle with some of it's implications too; plus you have had some bad church experiences with reformed people (BTW, I've had them too) too which likely adds to the stigma.

That makes sense. Showbread is actually who introduced me to openness theology.

You are approachable - I just know my own lack of communication skills and didn't want you to misunderstand my point.

It's not that I despise Reformed thought so much as I think it colors anything else one believes about God - and that's okay. Openness does too. I think it's more that with a secular band, I know that they outright disagree about Jesus - so they're starting on a bad foundation. With a Reformed artist (like LeCrae) it's hard because I feel as though they're starting on a foundation that's good but goes in a direction I can't follow.

I hadn't thought about my experiences adding to the stigma, as you said. I suppose that could be so...

Yeah, at times I have a harder time with thing I think are 90% true than with things that are only %10 true. That's because I expect if you get 90% right your sould be able to go all the way. That probably relates a lot to my sentiments on this thread.

by Gandalf the White Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:49 pm

d@v!d wrote:
Gandalf the White wrote:
d@v!d wrote:
Gandalf the White wrote: How do you filter a band you disagree with very heavily? For instance, I know you are of the Reformed camp - what would you do about a band like Showbread that sings (a lot) about openness ideas? Would you still listen to them, assuming you like the style of the music?
With a lot of wincing usually. If I really like what they are doing instrumentally, then I might pretend that the words mean something different or I might lower the volume or make a distracting noise to skip through a particularly bad lyric line.

I'm totally unfamiliar with Showbread, but I gave the example of Iahweh. They sing some things that I find to be shallow or just nonsensical. I can stand to listen to musicians whose messages I disagree with, but I long for better.
I'm not trying to argue here - I just want to know how others view this kind of thing.
I hope that I don't give the impression that I'm so unapproachable. I strive for transparency and diplomacy.
My wife doesn't understand how I can listen to some secular music when I disagree with some of their beliefs but I won't listen to an artist that is vocally Reformed in their theology.
Yes, that does seem a bit inconsistent on the surface, but I think it's just telling of where your passions are. You despise reformed theology more than secularism. Einfach. I think it's fine to know what you will or will not tolerate. I understand the difficulties that people have with reformed theology as I struggle with some of it's implications too; plus you have had some bad church experiences with reformed people (BTW, I've had them too) too which likely adds to the stigma.

That makes sense. Showbread is actually who introduced me to openness theology.

You are approachable - I just know my own lack of communication skills and didn't want you to misunderstand my point.

It's not that I despise Reformed thought so much as I think it colors anything else one believes about God - and that's okay. Openness does too. I think it's more that with a secular band, I know that they outright disagree about Jesus - so they're starting on a bad foundation. With a Reformed artist (like LeCrae) it's hard because I feel as though they're starting on a foundation that's good but goes in a direction I can't follow.

I hadn't thought about my experiences adding to the stigma, as you said. I suppose that could be so...
Yeah, at times I have a harder time with thing I think are 90% true than with things that are only %10 true. That's because I expect if you get 90% right your sould be able to go all the way. That probably relates a lot to my sentiments on this thread.

Great point. I would agree with that - but only 90% agree

by alldatndensum Mon Feb 16, 2015 4:47 am

Gandalf the White wrote:
messiaen77 wrote:
d@v!d wrote:
messiaen77 wrote:In fairness, I don't think it is a problem limited to Christian music. To find music of real artistic quality ANYWHERE you have to look for it. Mainstream music is just as banal as Christian music is. Look at what were supposedly the five best songs this year? How many of those were great works of art?
You beat me to it. I was thinking of this last night and relates to what GG was saying. I suppose that the system does seem to encourage artist to produce appealing to the lower denominators.

Still, should the children of God not do better? If we are guardians of the truth, shouldn't it affect our art in the best of ways? So, if not, then perhaps it fallows what I have been thinking about immaturity being a restraining factor.
Absolutely!! Here is a quote I found during my dissertation work that I have really started taking to heart:

Harold Best wrote:We must always remember that the very subversion of quality communicates something about the kind of gospel we are trying to propagate. If we faithfully followed God’s example, there would no longer be the crassness or cynicism or the throwaway of the false pomp and pretense of art for the ages. Nor would the Holy Spirit be continually pestered to turn poor work into blessed work. The Christian musician has no right whatsoever to assume that anything other than the mind of Christ and the Creatorhood of God should guide every note composed, arranged, played, and sung.

Here's my honest opinion on "Christian music" and why I hate the term. Most of what we talk about as being "Christian music" is really just a means for spreading a message, and that makes it propaganda, not art. I think there is a place for propaganda, but we shouldn't confuse it with art. When I listen to music as an art, I'm not looking to be further indoctrinated into a belief system I have already bought into, I'm looking for something that truly edifies me by feeding my soul. I want something that challenges my mind and inspires me. I want songs about life. I want artists to at least convince me they are being real and raw. I meet God when I listen to Mahler and Miles. I have deep worship listening to Coltrane and The Civil Wars. I like Christian metal because it is loud and aggressive and meets a cathartic emotional need. I prefer it over a lot of secular metal because a lot of secular metal (not all) has a really negative, nihilistic vibe that leaves me feeling more drained than empowered.

I am certainly not saying that Christians can't and don't make that kind of music, write those kinds of songs, or engage me in those ways. I'm just saying that the mainstream of Christian music is more often than not concerned with being on message so that it can find its way onto K-Love than finding its way into the hearts of a dying world that is desperately clinging to anything in its search for substance and meaning. Art is adventurous, creative, and pushes boundaries because it seeks to edify and inspire. Propaganda is safe, predictable, and works within the familiar because anything else might distract from the message. I'm ok with Christian propaganda, but I'm not ok with calling it art.
This plus 1000

I will agree with everything said there. I've even been guilty of writing this way.

Let's also point out that many non-Christian artists do the same thing. To me, when a band consistently sings about living a life full of debauchery over and over again, they too are selling an agenda. People call it life but only because they are accepting of the hype or living the same life. Rarely do you find innovators in music anymore. Even once great innovators fall into the same pattern and repeat the same things, but secular artists get a clean slate when it comes to that. How many times has AC/DC made the same album? Nickelback? Lady GaGa. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Plus, the message many times is the same. It's an agenda.

Truthfully, without divine inspiration, most music becomes an agenda and a platform to deliver a message you feel everyone else should live by when you examine it as a whole.

I DO get that Christians should strive more for innovation and realness with lyrics and how we handle the glorious holiness of God and Jesus. However, even that can quickly become formulaic and an agenda if we aren't careful. In the end, we all want to make quality art, but we'd like to sell it too. Too often, people WANT the formula and the agenda they agree with.

by sentient 6 Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:32 pm

Friday13th wrote:
Ugh, it's not helping our friendship either, sentient 6. I had no idea this was true until I googled it right now and read some comments by Neal back in 2007. Thank you, Mr. Bubble-Burster!

This makes me examine my values. I am big on core beliefs, but none of Neal's beliefs on the Trinity are evident in his music, so what's the big deal? The man is wrong in one thing so all his work is wrong? I know many Christians don't understand the Trinity (like all of us honestly) so they choose not to believe in it because it's not humanly rational. Does that mean Jesus won't save them because they can't grasp how Jesus is also the Father and the Holy Spirit but...in layman's terms...also not really? I don't think so, even though I do consider that a core Christian belief. It's clear if you study The Bible enough that the Trinity is woven from the OT all the way till the new. Maybe Neal just needs to read some more. God's mysteries are God's mysteries is how I come to an abrupt conclusion.

Again, this illustrates why depending on an artist's beliefs is silly. I had no idea Neal didn't believe in the trinity from anything he's written. Why should we care if the work is good? It's like everyone who held on to words of famous preachers, and then when come to find out they were living double lives...then they disown all their books and cassettes. Human mistakes don't invalidate God's work through humans. If it did God could not work through humans cause we all make mistakes.

Let me just say that what someones believes in one area does effect what they believe in other areas. Neal writes about Luther, the Reformation and Sola Scriptura. I won't go into here, but Neal has a biblical view that effects those subjects. He praises Luther, but Luther was a devoted Trinitarian. We have the doctrine of the Trinity as a direct result of the principle sola scriptura ( and Tota Scriptura ).

Friday, you said " Does that mean Jesus won't save them because they can't grasp how Jesus is also the Father and the Holy Spirit but...in layman's terms...also not really? Now, I really am not trying to be a jerk, but the whole theological concept of the Trinity is to teach that Jesus Christ is not the Father...or the Holy Spirit. One God who has eternally existed as three separate and distinct personalities. That there is a eternal relationship between the Father, Son and Spirit. Without that theological concept, the scriptures make little sense. And that matters.

....where are all the songs taking about the eternal wonder and awe about triune nature of God ? That inspires more. To contemplate the nature of God as what is revealed in the Bible.

As a side note, I do see a difference between someone who simply does not understand the Trinity and is sorting that out and someone who is actively opposing the Trinity ( JWs, unitarians etc ).

by sentient 6 Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:56 pm

Friday13th wrote:Again sentient 6, you're missing the big questions on this discussion. Theology is important, but it's not needed to the extent you think it is.

I think you guys assume when I write " theology " that I always mean some elborate doctrine. Theology is simply trying to understand how God has revealed Himself to His creation. When Christians say " Jesus is Lord, " that is a theological statement. And Christian artists should some kind of working knowledge of the scriptures and have desire to write songs that inspire us deeper into why Jesus Christ is Lord ( just one example mind you ).

Like I said, bands should write about what they know, and I don't care how simple the theological concept is....just write something that can build up, inspire and edify Believers.

.....thats if they are are trying to produce real christian themed music. If the band simply wants to be " christians in a band " then thats a whole other story.

by sentient 6 Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:57 pm

...I will catch up on the rest of the responses to me when I get more time.

.....and I know you guys can't wait... Evil or Very Mad

by Friday13th Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:00 pm

haha right Mad

Just don't poke any more holes in my favorite bands' theologies, okay? Razz

by sentient 6 Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:15 pm

Friday13th wrote:
Pretty bad interpretation if you ask me. Only rich people could afford meat, so these were meats for pleasure not because people were starving. Also, if they weren't Paul would rebuke them for being silly martyrs for dying over something so arbitrary. The meat was not created by God any more than a song is created by God. It had to be prepared for a purpose from the raw materials God made. At least you're consistent though. Now I know why you have these very rigid ideas about the kind of things you put up with and which you stay away from.

Well, I wasn't giving a full out exegesis of the text, but simply wanted see how this text has real practical application to us today in regards to entertainment.

There some historical context in which it was quite common for people to offer meats to pagan gods in most of the temples. Then, they would sell the meat out of the back of the temple. Once again though, we are dealing things that we need to live by ( food ) vs things that are not necessary that deal with ideas and beliefs ( music ). I guess if this verse does have real application to this subject then so does texts such as Phil 4:8 and Eph 5:11 ( specifically songs about glorifying " deeds of darkness " ).

by sentient 6 Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:46 pm

Friday13th wrote:haha right Just don't poke any more holes in my favorite bands' theologies, okay?

...I will try to remember to keep the " cat " in the " bag. " Cool

by Friday13th Wed Feb 18, 2015 8:33 pm

sentient 6 wrote:
Friday13th wrote:Again sentient 6, you're missing the big questions on this discussion. Theology is important, but it's not needed to the extent you think it is.

I think you guys assume when I write " theology " that I always mean some elborate doctrine. Theology is simply trying to understand how God has revealed Himself to His creation. When Christians say " Jesus is Lord, " that is a theological statement. And Christian artists should some kind of working knowledge of the scriptures and have desire to write songs that inspire us deeper into why Jesus Christ is Lord ( just one example mind you ).

Like I said, bands should write about what they know, and I don't care how simple the theological concept is....just write something that can build up, inspire and edify Believers.

.....thats if they are are trying to produce real christian themed music. If the band simply wants to be " christians in a band " then thats a whole other story.

Yeah man, I don't see anything you're saying now that I don't agree with, but you can't blame me for thinking you did mean an "elaborate doctrine." Let's just do what I had to do with my conversation with David...scratch everything we've said since like the second page of this thread! Okay, so we agree that Christian artists need to expand on the why we love Jesus, how God works his wonders, when history has shown this, etc. All the concrete, thought-provoking stuff that a bands like Tourniquet has no problem doing. Bingo! flower

by StarFire Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:50 am

Friday13th wrote:I think this thread needs some more agreements...and good music.

+1

To be honest, I wasn't expecting this thread to make it past the first page. face palm

by messiaen77 Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:40 pm

sentient 6 wrote:

....where are all the songs taking about the eternal wonder and awe about triune nature of God ? That inspires more. To contemplate the nature of God as what is revealed in the Bible.

I think there is a word missing in there. "That inspires me more." We all walk our walks differently and we are all inspired by different things. It also creates a very narrow view of "Christian content."

by Gandalf the White Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:50 am

messiaen77 wrote:
sentient 6 wrote:

....where are all the songs taking about the eternal wonder and awe about triune nature of God ? That inspires more. To contemplate the nature of God as what is revealed in the Bible.

I think there is a word missing in there. "That inspires me more." We all walk our walks differently and we are all inspired by different things. It also creates a very narrow view of "Christian content."

But in order for a band to be "christian", there must be a certain number of times they explicitly mention Jesus or God in their lyrics right? I mean, just because Neon Horse thanks Jesus in the liner notes doesn't make them a Christian band - their lyrics are too "poetic".

by Candlemass Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:06 pm

http://kempercrabbmusic.com/the-disconnect-why-evangelicals-make-bad-art-part-the-twenty-fifth/

by StarFire Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:40 pm

Candlemass wrote:http://kempercrabbmusic.com/the-disconnect-why-evangelicals-make-bad-art-part-the-twenty-fifth/

Thanks for posting that Candlemass.

I thought this portion was the most interesting.

It is frequently assumed that the only “spiritual” emotion for Christians to experience or display (especially in worship) is happiness. As a result, songs (and other artistic expressions), especially worship songs, generally seek to urge listeners/worshippers to a state of happiness or manifestations of joy, and other emotional states or expressions are ignored or are considered improper for life and worship.

Yet God’s Word reveals the Incarnate Lord as experiencing a full range of human emotions: Jesus was joyful, yes (John 17:13), but He also exhibited anger (Mark 3:5), and compassion (Matt. 9:36; 15:32; Luke 10:33), and wept (John 11:35) and was sorrowful (Isaiah 53:54; Matt. 26:37-38; Mark 14:34).

These cannot have been sinful, because Scripture explicitly tells us that Jesus never sinned, emotionally or otherwise (2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 2: 21-22; 1 John 3: 4-5). Since Christ did not sin in experiencing these Emotions, it is obvious that simply experiencing them does not, in itself, constitute sin (though they may, any of them, flow from sins). Rather, we see that this range of emotions are appropriate to human existence in the world, and all of them (as they were with Christ) are suitable for spiritual expression and experience (even worship).

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:19 pm

messiaen77 wrote:
I think there is a word missing in there. "That inspires me more." We all walk our walks differently and we are all inspired by different things. It also creates a very narrow view of "Christian content."

Christianity is narrow. Ok, what do you think ? If something insires a Christian more than the contemplation of the source of their faith ( God ), wouldn't that be a form of idolatry ?

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:22 pm

Friday13th wrote:
Yeah man, I don't see anything you're saying now that I don't agree with, but you can't blame me for thinking you did mean an "elaborate doctrine." Let's just do what I had to do with my conversation with David...scratch everything we've said since like the second page of this thread! Okay, so we agree that Christian artists need to expand on the why we love Jesus, how God works his wonders, when history has shown this, etc. All the concrete, thought-provoking stuff that a bands like Tourniquet has no problem doing. Bingo!

...all is good.

Yes, I enjoy Tourniquets old stuff, but I don't care much for Teds current obession.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:31 pm

Gandalf the White wrote:
But in order for a band to be "christian", there must be a certain number of times they explicitly mention Jesus or God in their lyrics right? I mean, just because Neon Horse thanks Jesus in the liner notes doesn't make them a Christian band - their lyrics are too "poetic".

Just think if the Hymn writers of the past took this attitude.

I mentioned this before, but this is just a symptom of some movements in Christianity that desire to be more therapeutically-driven rather than theologically-driven.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:47 pm

Candlemass wrote:http://kempercrabbmusic.com/the-disconnect-why-evangelicals-make-bad-art-part-the-twenty-fifth/

I agree whole-heartedly.

I like the point about modern worship. In churches there are songs and services that simply get people on emotional highs, were the focus is inward instead of outward towards God. And I agree 150% that we should also focus on the wonder of the incarnation.

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, ⁶who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, ⁷but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. ⁸And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

¹⁵For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

⁷In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. ⁸Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. ⁹And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, ¹⁰being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.

I am not saying we can't be poetic. But we should be able to tell that a song about Christs humanity is a song about Christs humanity.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:51 pm

Gandalf the White wrote:

And sentient6, I see your point but you start your post with the words "I never really liked..." Seems odd for a guy who preaches that we have to fit our theology to the Bible and not the other way around.

Yes, but you got to read the words that come after the " I never really like. " I don't, for exegetical reasons and thats consistent with what I always say.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:58 pm

Gandalf the White wrote:
So since it isn't meat, it's acceptable for you to "pass judgement on the servant of another" aka me?

Ok Gandalf, let me clarify this ( and it should have been clear about the point of the Clashes lyrics ). I wasn't judging you for listening the band. I was judging your statement that some of the Clashes songs reflect something in Christianity. And that, is something that is fair game to scrutinize from a Biblical perspective.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 10:56 pm

Gandalf the White wrote:
I really like how you ignored the rest of my post about how crappy I was treated at my last church (and some of the more concerning issues in this paragraph too) so you could still point out how wrong I was about something. Must make you feel very righteous.

Could I recommend a book to you? It's called Benefit of the Doubt by Greg Boyd. It talks about how how absolute certainty about matters of the faith can become an idol.

Sorry Gandalf, I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I guess I need to be more sensitive to where people are coming from. I know my time is usually pretty short on forums so I guess I try to focus on my points. But sometimes it can be at the exspense of peoples feelings.

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:06 pm

messiaen77 wrote:
To your first response, the Spirit of God working within us. If we are Christians and are truly seeking to glorify God in our art, do you really think it won't come through? That the Spirit will not speak to the hearts of the people who partake in it?

How do we keep from getting to esoteric about what we feel and think ? How do we know when its more about what your feelings are leading us to do or say rather than the true will of the Holy Spirit ?

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:13 pm

Gandalf the White wrote:
I've explained openness to some people and they just don't get it. It's not that they disagree; they simply don't understand. Is it willful misunderstanding? I don't know that either.

Philosophy has that effect on many people. Myself included. Wink

by sentient 6 Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:27 pm

d@v!d wrote:
I just wish there were more music that I didn't have to filter to enjoy. Why don't we Christians love God more to announce His glory in our art?

I believe because the churches that feel they must be seen as " relevant " to culture and the unbelieving world. And they are modeling its " theraputic " approach rather than one based on the authority of scripture.

by Sponsored content