The Order of Elijah drops the "Christian" name

I'd have to see a source for Demon Hunter, because I recall only a year or two ago they made a video saying how a lot of bands "beat around the bush" and say they are Christians in a band. But Ryan Clark said "we are a Christian band". I'd be surprised if they dropped the title after so adamantly standing up for it.

And Red in Concerts always lets it be known where they stand.  I have seen them in concert many times.

alldatndensum wrote:

Temple of Blood wrote:Funny how all disagreements these days get characterized as hate.  A way to shut down discussion ?

You nailed it, bro.  Either label someone as a hater or as a racist and you can now win any argument.  That is Liberal Logic 101 these days.

As a moderate that rejects liberal and conservative political ghettos, I find that an odd statement. Conservative tend to call someone a hater, liberals tend to go with racist. But using a term like "Liberal Logic 101" just shows that you prefer to stereotype people and not even care to understand where they are coming from. Not to mention that labeling someone as hater or racist is not "logic" at all. Logic has to do with a structure of an argument. I don't get liberals that much, but the conservative party has gone so far off the deep end of weirdness I can't even try to unravel why anyone would act this way.

I think many of you should actually try to get to know some people that consider themselves liberal and/or progressive Christians. You might find they are not anti-Christian, but so pro-Jesus that they don't want to add American cultural filters to their theology. In fact, you might surprised to find out that some of the owners of the Christian labels many of you buy from are actually progressive Christians and very "on fire" for God. Some of you probably even bought a CD this year from a band that does not believe homosexuality is a sin. They even get accused of "trolling" other Christians and "posting anti-Christian" stuff, when that is not the case. So sorry if I am not going to believe a bunch of gossip here on this page, which may just very well be people getting mad about a progressive Christian posting about their beliefs on term (homosexuality) that wasn't even invented until 1869 and did not appear in Bibles until the 1950s. I'll get called an anti-Christian and troll and probably even banned from this forum for pointing out that truth right there, even though I'm not stating my stance on it. I have just learned enough about how conservative Christians judge anyone that dares think differently than their clone mindset to know what will happen next from most people who call themselves a Christian. Never really listened to this band, nor do I know anything about this lead singer. He could really be a jerk about all of it. Regardless, I don't think calling someone a tool (which is technically a sexual reference) is doing anything but responding in the same spirit. So, yeah, using a pornographic sexual reference to disagree with someone's theology and then gossip about the whole thing WHILE claiming they are not Christian.... got it.

Well stated grandeped...I agree

grandeped wrote:But using a term like "Liberal Logic 101" just shows that you prefer to stereotype people and not even care to understand where they are coming from.

That well may be true.

But, there is a phenomena, call it what you want 'LL101,' that is observable. I talk to all kinds of people and among those who hold to liberal ideas much more than conservative ideas, I see blaring inconsistencies in thinking or contradictory values that they seem unaware of that they espouse.

I do agree that we need to be very careful in how and when we label others.

grandeped wrote:I think many of you should actually try to get to know some people that consider themselves liberal and/or progressive Christians. You might find they are not anti-Christian, but so pro-Jesus that they don't want to add American cultural filters to their theology. In fact, you might surprised to find out that some of the owners of the Christian labels many of you buy from are actually progressive Christians and very "on fire" for God. Some of you probably even bought a CD this year from a band that does not believe homosexuality is a sin. They even get accused of "trolling" other Christians and "posting anti-Christian" stuff, when that is not the case. So sorry if I am not going to believe a bunch of gossip here on this page, which may just very well be people getting mad about a progressive Christian posting about their beliefs on term (homosexuality) that wasn't even invented until 1869 and did not appear in Bibles until the 1950s. I'll get called an anti-Christian and troll and probably even banned from this forum for pointing out that truth right there, even though I'm not stating my stance on it. I have just learned enough about how conservative Christians judge anyone that dares think differently than their clone mindset to know what will happen next from most people who call themselves a Christian. Never really listened to this band, nor do I know anything about this lead singer. He could really be a jerk about all of it. Regardless, I don't think calling someone a tool (which is technically a sexual reference) is doing anything but responding in the same spirit. So, yeah, using a pornographic sexual reference to disagree with someone's theology and then gossip about the whole thing WHILE claiming they are not Christian.... got it.

I agree that we ought to get to know others who are liberal and what not. A question for you, out of curiosity; have you gotten to know any 'conservative' Christians? Is it possible that they are on fire too?

I think it's OK to call a duck a duck. I don't think anyone here who threw out derogatory names about him did so because they disagree with his theology, but just because of his actions and attitude. I think you have a point using that word. A better term could have been picked.

Also, don't worry, nobody gets banned here for their theology, just their sportsmanship.

Another thing. I'm curious as to your 1950's reference. What exactly do you think began to appear in Bibles then, the term homosexuality, or somethings else?

grandeped wrote:I think many of you should actually try to get to know some people that consider themselves liberal and/or progressive Christians. You might find they are not anti-Christian, but so pro-Jesus that they don't want to add American cultural filters to their theology. In fact, you might surprised to find out that some of the owners of the Christian labels many of you buy from are actually progressive Christians and very "on fire" for God. Some of you probably even bought a CD this year from a band that does not believe homosexuality is a sin. They even get accused of "trolling" other Christians and "posting anti-Christian" stuff, when that is not the case. So sorry if I am not going to believe a bunch of gossip here on this page, which may just very well be people getting mad about a progressive Christian posting about their beliefs on term (homosexuality) that wasn't even invented until 1869 and did not appear in Bibles until the 1950s. I'll get called an anti-Christian and troll and probably even banned from this forum for pointing out that truth right there, even though I'm not stating my stance on it. I have just learned enough about how conservative Christians judge anyone that dares think differently than their clone mindset to know what will happen next from most people who call themselves a Christian. Never really listened to this band, nor do I know anything about this lead singer. He could really be a jerk about all of it. Regardless, I don't think calling someone a tool (which is technically a sexual reference) is doing anything but responding in the same spirit. So, yeah, using a pornographic sexual reference to disagree with someone's theology and then gossip about the whole thing WHILE claiming they are not Christian.... got it.

There is no way the Christian teaching on homosexuality is a new thing. Ask any gay activist, the ancient Roman and Greek world was full of homosexuality, and nowhere is there any evidence that the Jews, Jesus, or his disciples allowed it. The Bible is clear sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is sin. All Christians have to deal with sexual boundaries. 

I'm sorry some like the guys from the Order of Elijah start of as strong Christians and "progress" past the need to take the Bible literally. Being a Christian means you understand you can't always please the world and please God. I've seen it many times, a so called "progressive Christian" starts off trying to defend liberal ideas with the Bible. That doesn't last long, since most don't have any backing besides a few verses out of context.  

The problem is the way some Christians are fixated on one sin and act like selectively pointing out sin to those in the world will help. Jesus wasn't. He said to come to Him and forsake all sin. No point in either denying some sins or acting as if some are worse than others.

I'm not a native speaker of English but I don't understand something; is "tool" the word "fool" in disguise?. You now what? If it's a disguise it doesn't make it more Christian. It is still not right. If somebody can't see the light of God it has nothing to do with folly but with spiritual powers coming from Satan who tries to pull him over. And we all know that even God himself blinds us sometimes. Nobody got saved because of being wise and smart. It is mercy alone if God lets us find him.

sadvader wrote:I'm not a native speaker of English but I don't understand something; is "tool" the word "fool" in disguise?. You now what? If it's a disguise it doesn't make it more Christian. It is still not right. If somebody can't see the light of God it has nothing to do with folly but with spiritual powers coming from Satan who tries to pull him over. And we all know that even God himself blinds us sometimes. Nobody got saved because of being wise and smart. It is mercy alone if God lets us find him.

No, calling someone a "tool" is basically like calling someone a "fool" (like the Bible says NOT to do) only worse. You're right, it's not helpful to anyone.

sadvader wrote:I'm not a native speaker of English but I don't understand something; is "tool" the word "fool" in disguise?. You now what? If it's a disguise it doesn't make it more Christian. It is still not right. If somebody can't see the light of God it has nothing to do with folly but with spiritual powers coming from Satan who tries to pull him over. And we all know that even God himself blinds us sometimes. Nobody got saved because of being wise and smart. It is mercy alone if God lets us find him.

AMEN

sadvader wrote:I'm not a native speaker of English but I don't understand something; is "tool" the word "fool" in disguise?. You now what? If it's a disguise it doesn't make it more Christian. It is still not right. If somebody can't see the light of God it has nothing to do with folly but with spiritual powers coming from Satan who tries to pull him over. And we all know that even God himself blinds us sometimes. Nobody got saved because of being wise and smart. It is mercy alone if God lets us find him.

Dein Englisch ist gut. You make sense. Just take some time and look up words when you aren't sure. I have to all the time.
No, t isn't f in disguise. They aren't synonyms even though they rhyme.
T has to do with one's comportment.
F has to do with lack of prudence.

I agree totally about the spiritual forces and the need for God''s mercy.

Friday13th wrote:No, calling someone a "tool" is basically like calling someone a "fool" (like the Bible says NOT to do) only worse. You're right, it's not helpful to anyone.

I agree with what you say about the biblical prohibition to call someone a fool and the t word is quite vulgar as has been pointed out, but do you think the bible prohibits us from making note of when someone is a big time breaker of 'Wheaton's law', to put it in more palatable terms?

grandeped wrote:I think many of you should actually try to get to know some people that consider themselves liberal and/or progressive Christians. You might find they are not anti-Christian, but so pro-Jesus that they don't want to add American cultural filters to their theology. In fact, you might surprised to find out that some of the owners of the Christian labels many of you buy from are actually progressive Christians and very "on fire" for God. Some of you probably even bought a CD this year from a band that does not believe homosexuality is a sin. They even get accused of "trolling" other Christians and "posting anti-Christian" stuff, when that is not the case. So sorry if I am not going to believe a bunch of gossip here on this page, which may just very well be people getting mad about a progressive Christian posting about their beliefs on term (homosexuality) that wasn't even invented until 1869 and did not appear in Bibles until the 1950s. I'll get called an anti-Christian and troll and probably even banned from this forum for pointing out that truth right there, even though I'm not stating my stance on it. I have just learned enough about how conservative Christians judge anyone that dares think differently than their clone mindset to know what will happen next from most people who call themselves a Christian. Never really listened to this band, nor do I know anything about this lead singer. He could really be a jerk about all of it. Regardless, I don't think calling someone a tool (which is technically a sexual reference) is doing anything but responding in the same spirit. So, yeah, using a pornographic sexual reference to disagree with someone's theology and then gossip about the whole thing WHILE claiming they are not Christian.... got it.

actually the term "homosexual" is the very same term to describe what the bible calls a sin. "it is an abomination for a man to lay with a man as a man lives with a woman"  Therefore yes Homosexuality would be considered a sin according to the bible.  There are many terms that are not in the original texts but the terms we use now mean the SAME thing.

Some us dont live under the old testament law..in fact the theology I follow (new covenant free grace) says that we are not under the law anymore nor do we obey the laws written on stone....and where there is no law there is no record of sin being kept... The Bible also doesn't say anywhere that we have to believe every word in it to be saved...in fact Jesus never promised or told us to look out for any written words or even any more prophets or teachers...He said the Holy Spirit would be sent to be our guide, teacher, champion and comforter...Too think that the Bibles we have today are perfect and non fallible is to me ludacrious... In 1 Corinthians the word homosexual is actually mistranslated..in the original language it says male prostitutes...I tend to think that Shannon Law knows this and he very likely may follow the same theological doctrine as me...alot of what he says kinda lines up with it..(and yes, I sometimes quote atheist who do a good job of going after evangelicals and Catholics)...Now back to Shannon..again I have no problem with what he says..I agree with him that sin has nothing to do with ones salvation...

I agree that we ought to get to know others who are liberal and what not. A question for you, out of curiosity; have you gotten to know any 'conservative' Christians? Is it possible that they are on fire too?

I know this question wasn't directed at me but I will say I grew up in house where both of my parents were conservative christians ( I hated it and would have been better off with atheist parents imo) and yes I know plenty of conservative evangelicals..heck man, i grew up in Texas and live in oklahoma...we are covered in them   Very few that I find are on fire for God..most are on fire for religion only and most of them want to rule our country..kind of a conservative ISIS in my opinion.... I left another christian forum over the conservative views and the ignorance those guys over there showed me..especially the owner of the forum... So, my childhood experiences along with what I see and experience now have had a huge impact on my views towards conservatives as well as evangelicals...I am independent by the way and I dont like ultra-liberalism either...

And before the mods even say anything I will stop here and move on and agree to disagree..   (that means I wont be responding to any challenge of my post..because I am moving on now because I have nothing else to add)

Savage Amusement wrote:And before the mods even say anything I will stop here and move on and agree to disagree..   (that means I wont be responding to any challenge of my post..because I am moving on now because I have nothing else to add)

You can't disagree if you agree. That's racist!

Don't sweat it man...

Savage Amusement wrote:Some us dont live under the old testament law..in fact the theology I follow (new covenant free grace) says that we are not under the law anymore nor do we obey the laws written on stone....and where there is no law there is no record of sin being kept... The Bible also doesn't say anywhere that we have to believe every word in it to be saved...in fact Jesus never promised or told us to look out for any written words or even any more prophets or teachers...He said the Holy Spirit would be sent to be our guide, teacher, champion and comforter...Too think that the Bibles we have today are perfect and non fallible is to me ludacrious... In 1 Corinthians the word homosexual is actually mistranslated..in the original language it says male prostitutes...I tend to think that Shannon Law knows this and he very likely may follow the same theological doctrine as me...alot of what he says kinda lines up with it..(and yes, I sometimes quote atheist who do a good job of going after evangelicals and Catholics)...Now back to Shannon..again I have no problem with what he says..I agree with him that sin has nothing to do with ones salvation...

actually the New Testament says that Homosexuals, among many other Sexual immoral things, would NOT inherit the kingdom of Heaven.  That is NOT just a Old Testament item.  The term used for same sex relations of course is different than what we see today but the words used still have the same meaning as what homosexuals mean today.  Like it or not.  The bible is explicit and there is no making an exception or hiding behind words that are used to day that have the same meaning as words used originally and then saying "that word wasn't in the original bible therefore it is ok"  NO it isn't  You have to look at the meaning of the word or THE ACT being described.  In this case the word we use today describes the very same act that we term Homosexual today.  It is called sin in both the Old AND New Testament.  Yes we live under grace and not law BUT Christ did not come to DESTROY the law but to COMPLETE it.  We STILL have to live repentant of sin not like " Oh I live under grace so I can sin if I want it's ok"  That is simply not true and is being taught by many, and in many cases it is being taught so as to give a way for people to feel ok about them living in sin without consequences yet the bible is clear there WILL BE consequences for living a live of sin what ever the sin may be.  What Shannon is teaching is NOT biblical in the least not at all and THAT is the issue many of us have with him and his band.  It isn't just ONE topic as you seem to be trying to make it out to be.  That was just one of many that happened to be brought up.  Actually sin DOES have very much to do with ones salvation.  If you continue to sin you have no salvation as you can't enter heaven.  The bible makes that pretty clear.  
1 Corinthians 6:9-15New International Version (NIV)
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Sexual Immorality

12 “I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 You say, “Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy them both.” The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never!

Footnotes:

1. 1 Corinthians 6:9 The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts.
   

[size]
Is just ONE of the verses that reference this act.[/size]

Now back to The Order Of Elijah.  Don't like them won't listen to them don't care what anyone thinks.  The band has bad theology, better yet false theology, and that is why I don't like them.  I have also had talks with the band and I assure you there is nothing Christian about them in the least.  They are rather a lot like Joel Olsteen in the way they go about teaching the word of God and what they teach people is not biblical at all and in no way will lead anyone to a True relationship with Christ or lead them to eternity with Christ as long as they teach this liberal idea that "oh what ever I am under grace so I can do what I want how I want when I want".  The only path that that thinking leads to is the path to Hell.

We NEED more Christian metal that teaches truth and bold truth even if people don't want to hear the truth.

grandeped wrote:I think many of you should actually try to get to know some people that consider themselves liberal and/or progressive Christians. You might find they are not anti-Christian, but so pro-Jesus that they don't want to add American cultural filters to their theology.

What I find at the heart of " liberal " christianity is usually some sort of diminished view of scripture, or a diminished authority of scripture. I believe there is more of a tendency for culture to determine the direction in liberal christianity. The scriptures are used to shape some beliefs, but in a very secondary fashion. There is a tendency to let the culture dictate the Christian world view in liberal churches rather than the Word of God.

Let's refocus, folks........band and band related, not so much offshoot theology not related to band and thread topic.  a little less hijack, a little more "on topic", please.

The reins have been loosened, not taken off........

lhversaw wrote:Now back to The Order Of Elijah.  Don't like them won't listen to them don't care what anyone thinks.  The band has bad theology, better yet false theology, and that is why I don't like them.  I have also had talks with the band and I assure you there is nothing Christian about them in the least.  They are rather a lot like Joel Olsteen in the way they go about teaching the word of God and what they teach people is not biblical at all and in no way will lead anyone to a True relationship with Christ or lead them to eternity with Christ as long as they teach this liberal idea that "oh what ever I am under grace so I can do what I want how I want when I want".  The only path that that thinking leads to is the path to Hell.

We NEED more Christian metal that teaches truth and bold truth even if people don't want to hear the truth.

Amen and well said!

exo wrote:Let's refocus, folks........band and band related, not so much offshoot theology not related to band and thread topic a little less hijack, a little more "on topic", please.

The reins have been loosened, not taken off........

Yeah, I get you, but it's been an interesting conversation, don't you think?

I wish I had more to say about the band, I never heard of it until this thread.


Just checked out a video. The music is tight. Not my thing though. Singer look like he could have been in FGTH...

lhversaw wrote:We NEED more Christian metal that teaches truth and bold truth even if people don't want to hear the truth.

....and...AMEN !