US Govt Health Jay Sekulow etc.

A place for Petra fans to discuss other topics
User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1387
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake-Up Call
Pethead since: 1983
x 266

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by Mountain Man » Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:38 am

rexreed wrote:You don't have to agree with me, I'm OK with that.
You're missing the point. I'm sure if you dug deeply enough then you could find all sorts of unsavory details about the people who make the stuff you enjoy listening to, watching, reading, etc. -- heck, in many cases, you don't even have to dig very deeply at all. For that matter, even the various members of Petra have done some questionable things throughout the band's history. So what? I still like the music. Has Jay Sekulow done things that I personally wouldn't approve of? Probably, at least according to his Wikipedia page (assuming it's accurate). Doesn't mean you'll go to hell if you listen to this cover, tap your foot, and say, "This rocks!"
0 x

Shell
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 3242
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:26 am
#1 Album: Beyond Belief
Pethead since: 1985
Location: L.A. area
x 43
Contact:

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by Shell » Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:36 am

Mountain Man wrote:
rexreed wrote:You don't have to agree with me, I'm OK with that.
You're missing the point. I'm sure if you dug deeply enough then you could find all sorts of unsavory details about the people who make the stuff you enjoy listening to, watching, reading, etc. -- heck, in many cases, you don't even have to dig very deeply at all. For that matter, even the various members of Petra have done some questionable things throughout the band's history. So what? I still like the music. Has Jay Sekulow done things that I personally wouldn't approve of? Probably, at least according to his Wikipedia page (assuming it's accurate). Doesn't mean you'll go to hell if you listen to this cover, tap your foot, and say, "This rocks!"
The distinguishing factor here is that these folks get attention from the public that most other people normally don't get. Good grief, we've all done things that could be considered questionable and we all have skeletons in our closets. Wrong isn't more wrong because of media coverage, and there is nothing in the Bible to indicate that you can't read or listen to something if you don't happen to agree with the person. In fact, you can't decide whether you agree or not unless you do read or listen first; you need information for that.
0 x

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4302
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 149

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by brent » Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:23 pm

Some people think that ministry or para-church ministry and businesses providing good and services to Christians should be poor, not save for the future, etc.
0 x

User avatar
Dan
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 2529
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2003 4:17 am
#1 Album: This Means War!
Pethead since: 1987
Location: USA
x 80

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by Dan » Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:19 pm

I'm sorry Rex, I was googling stuff about him and thought it had to do with some Jewish US coalition, so what's everyone pickle with this guy? Someone explain it please!
0 x

User avatar
p-freak
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1538
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:01 am
#1 Album: Unseen Power
Pethead since: 1992
Location: The Netherlands
x 66
Contact:

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by p-freak » Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:46 pm

I have no objections against John working with Sekulow on some music. I don't know much about Sekulow and I don't want to know much about him. My impression is that he has connections in some way with the political conservative right. That's his choice and even if I fundamentally would disagree with him, it's not my business and it would never be a reason not to listen to these Sekulow and Friends recordings. Probably nothing wrong with the guy other than that I disagree with him.

For me the issue is about John working with Sekulow. I don't care about John's political opinion and I don't want him to express that through his music. I'm sure that John will have biblical reasons to justify his political point of view, but being a Christian doesn't oblige you to find your political home where he's found it. I happen to use the same bible and come to a completely different conclusion. So I don't like it when John is putting out his political opinion through his ministry, because I only care about his music and absolutely not about his political views. (This is all based on only two of John's songs: The Cross Remains - in the context of The Export DVD - and Faith & Freedom, so I usually choose to skip those two songs.)

It's amazing that the Riker boys got this chance to sing and perform with John! I can imagine it's a dream come true.
0 x
Image

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4302
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 149

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by brent » Sat Oct 19, 2013 7:52 am

John and Jay are:
1. For freedom.
2. For protection of life and against killing unborn babies against their will. Democrats are for killing babies against their will, so is the devil.
3. Against the restrictions and impedances put on gathering lawfully to pray, worship. Jay is not fighting for any one denomination or religion. Jay is in fact a Jew that believes in Jesus Christ. He fights for all. Side note: freedom to practice religion of choice is not Biblical. I would say that this is unbiblical. God says "Thou shalt not have other gods before me. I AM THE LORD THY GOD." This is an American thing. So, this is more of a fight for equality thing IMO.
4. Against racism.
5. For releasing ministers, missionaries, citizens held illegally, against their will, against international laws, treaties, etc. Jay has been responsible for getting some released when the government would not or could not. This sounds like the work the church SHOULD be doing to me.
6. For the US Constitution and for the government staying out of the way of it. This has become a party thing. Democrats, such as our president, don't like the Constitution, do not enforce what they don't like, or act like it is not there at all in some areas. The Constitution gives us certain rights, and that is what John and Jay want to preserve. It should not be a Republican, Democrat or third party thing. People take the Bible and try to make it way what it does not say. Politicians and lawyers do the same with the Constitution to make it say what benefits them.

These are just of the topics off of the top of my head. If you are for killing babies, for giving preferential treatment to religions other than Christianity, for denying religious rights, for allowing your Christian citizens to sit in jail for giving humanitarian aid, for blocking the right to lawfully assemble because you do not like the reason for the assembly, then you ARE an unbiblical Democrat!

Sorry. Actions and products of those actions identify you. When we stand before judgement, we can claim the Christian label all we want to, but we will be judged by our actions. We will be rewarded accordingly.
0 x

Jan
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:45 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by Jan » Sat Oct 19, 2013 12:20 pm

p-freak wrote:
For me the issue is about John working with Sekulow. I don't care about John's political opinion and I don't want him to express that through his music. I'm sure that John will have biblical reasons to justify his political point of view, but being a Christian doesn't oblige you to find your political home where he's found it. I happen to use the same bible and come to a completely different conclusion. So I don't like it when John is putting out his political opinion through his ministry, because I only care about his music and absolutely not about his political views. (This is all based on only two of John's songs: The Cross Remains - in the context of The Export DVD - and Faith & Freedom, so I usually choose to skip those two songs.)
I get this, because I felt the same way when Mark Farner (of Grand Funk, my FAVORITE 70s band) had some political songs, which I don't remember now, I just remember I didn't like them or agree with them. So at the time I felt he should just stick with rock and leave his political opinions out of it. But now I think singers should be able to express their opinions, it is their music after all. So I wouldn't buy or listen to those Farner songs, but I still like him and love Grand Funk's music and his other music too.
0 x

executioner
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:56 am
#1 Album: JAH
Pethead since: 1980
Location: Earth
x 56

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by executioner » Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:14 am

brent wrote:John and Jay are:
1. For freedom.
2. For protection of life and against killing unborn babies against their will. Democrats are for killing babies against their will, so is the devil.
3. Against the restrictions and impedances put on gathering lawfully to pray, worship. Jay is not fighting for any one denomination or religion. Jay is in fact a Jew that believes in Jesus Christ. He fights for all. Side note: freedom to practice religion of choice is not Biblical. I would say that this is unbiblical. God says "Thou shalt not have other gods before me. I AM THE LORD THY GOD." This is an American thing. So, this is more of a fight for equality thing IMO.
4. Against racism.
5. For releasing ministers, missionaries, citizens held illegally, against their will, against international laws, treaties, etc. Jay has been responsible for getting some released when the government would not or could not. This sounds like the work the church SHOULD be doing to me.
6. For the US Constitution and for the government staying out of the way of it. This has become a party thing. Democrats, such as our president, don't like the Constitution, do not enforce what they don't like, or act like it is not there at all in some areas. The Constitution gives us certain rights, and that is what John and Jay want to preserve. It should not be a Republican, Democrat or third party thing. People take the Bible and try to make it way what it does not say. Politicians and lawyers do the same with the Constitution to make it say what benefits them.

These are just of the topics off of the top of my head. If you are for killing babies, for giving preferential treatment to religions other than Christianity, for denying religious rights, for allowing your Christian citizens to sit in jail for giving humanitarian aid, for blocking the right to lawfully assemble because you do not like the reason for the assembly, then you ARE an unbiblical Democrat!

Sorry. Actions and products of those actions identify you. When we stand before judgement, we can claim the Christian label all we want to, but we will be judged by our actions. We will be rewarded accordingly.

Rightfully said!
0 x
FORGIVE! FORGET! & LET GO!

executioner
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:56 am
#1 Album: JAH
Pethead since: 1980
Location: Earth
x 56

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by executioner » Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:19 am

p-freak wrote:I have no objections against John working with Sekulow on some music. I don't know much about Sekulow and I don't want to know much about him. My impression is that he has connections in some way with the political conservative right. That's his choice and even if I fundamentally would disagree with him, it's not my business and it would never be a reason not to listen to these Sekulow and Friends recordings. Probably nothing wrong with the guy other than that I disagree with him.

For me the issue is about John working with Sekulow. I don't care about John's political opinion and I don't want him to express that through his music. I'm sure that John will have biblical reasons to justify his political point of view, but being a Christian doesn't oblige you to find your political home where he's found it. I happen to use the same bible and come to a completely different conclusion. So I don't like it when John is putting out his political opinion through his ministry, because I only care about his music and absolutely not about his political views. (This is all based on only two of John's songs: The Cross Remains - in the context of The Export DVD - and Faith & Freedom, so I usually choose to skip those two songs.)

It's amazing that the Riker boys got this chance to sing and perform with John! I can imagine it's a dream come true.
So its ok to put out your opinion about on how you think John needs to keep his political stance to himself via his ministry but its not ok for John to put out his opinion on how he feels about his faith; How ironic.
0 x
FORGIVE! FORGET! & LET GO!

User avatar
p-freak
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1538
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:01 am
#1 Album: Unseen Power
Pethead since: 1992
Location: The Netherlands
x 66
Contact:

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by p-freak » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:41 am

brent wrote:John and Jay are:
1. For freedom.
2. For protection of life and against killing unborn babies against their will. Democrats are for killing babies against their will, so is the devil.
3. Against the restrictions and impedances put on gathering lawfully to pray, worship. Jay is not fighting for any one denomination or religion. Jay is in fact a Jew that believes in Jesus Christ. He fights for all. Side note: freedom to practice religion of choice is not Biblical. I would say that this is unbiblical. God says "Thou shalt not have other gods before me. I AM THE LORD THY GOD." This is an American thing. So, this is more of a fight for equality thing IMO.
4. Against racism.
5. For releasing ministers, missionaries, citizens held illegally, against their will, against international laws, treaties, etc. Jay has been responsible for getting some released when the government would not or could not. This sounds like the work the church SHOULD be doing to me.
6. For the US Constitution and for the government staying out of the way of it. This has become a party thing. Democrats, such as our president, don't like the Constitution, do not enforce what they don't like, or act like it is not there at all in some areas. The Constitution gives us certain rights, and that is what John and Jay want to preserve. It should not be a Republican, Democrat or third party thing. People take the Bible and try to make it way what it does not say. Politicians and lawyers do the same with the Constitution to make it say what benefits them.

These are just of the topics off of the top of my head. If you are for killing babies, for giving preferential treatment to religions other than Christianity, for denying religious rights, for allowing your Christian citizens to sit in jail for giving humanitarian aid, for blocking the right to lawfully assemble because you do not like the reason for the assembly, then you ARE an unbiblical Democrat!

Sorry. Actions and products of those actions identify you. When we stand before judgement, we can claim the Christian label all we want to, but we will be judged by our actions. We will be rewarded accordingly.
Most of the points you mention are commendable. The problem with politics is that neither side, nor any party, will represent my views fully. So I have to choose. You forget that your Biblical interpretation is coloured by your cultural americanity. Saying the right thing about one issue, doesn't necessarily make me run to your party. Conservative politics in America are well-known for ignoring the problems of poverty, environmental stewardship and social responsibility and they are quite to defend themselves that these issues for a believer are a matter of personal responsibility and don't involve the government. If you read the Old Testament you can't ignore the fact that particularly the issue of social justice is the most pervasive theme there and that the prophets were given the task to remind the priests and kings of their role in administering social justice. So there's my point of view based on the same Bible. I'm sure your point of view is just as valid, but I make different choice that are at least equally well-grounded in scripture and faith.
0 x
Image

User avatar
p-freak
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1538
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:01 am
#1 Album: Unseen Power
Pethead since: 1992
Location: The Netherlands
x 66
Contact:

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by p-freak » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:49 am

executioner wrote:So its ok to put out your opinion about on how you think John needs to keep his political stance to himself via his ministry but its not ok for John to put out his opinion on how he feels about his faith; How ironic.
I believe you are mixing up two different things. If John wants to put out his political stance through his ministry, he should do that. I don't like it and I subsequently ignore those parts of his ministry that are too politically coloured. In John's case, I think politics and faith have become too mixed up and don't allow space for others like myself to disagree with his politics without staunchly conservative fundamentalist republicans like yourself and Brent trying to discredit my faith because I don't happen to agree with you on a certain political issue.

I am only expressing my view here because Daniel asked what the issue was with Jay and John working together. I think I've tried to carefully explain that and you just seem to not want to give me the space to not like John's political point of view.

And besides, John's ministry platform is quite a bit bigger than my small petrazone-platform, so I don't really see the irony there. Especially because the equation conservativepolitics=biblicalfaith is fundamentally flawed.
0 x
Image

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4302
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 149

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by brent » Sun Oct 20, 2013 4:17 am

I am not discounting your faith. All I said was if you oppose those few things John and Jay hold to, you align yourself with an unbiblical, democrat, point of view. The unbiblical democrats believe in abortion, refusing people's rights to gather in public and pray, etc. Do you believe it is ok to murder babies and deny people rights given to them by their country's constitution/laws? I have heard Johns soap box sermons. There isn't anything unbiblical in what he says he believes about his country. John is anti-corruption. He is for the freedoms we are supposed to have. He is anti-oppression. He is for life. He is for peace. I just don't see how his views on things have adversely affected anyone. I don't see how singing some songs with a guy who has a radio ministry and active God-fearing legal team has to do with the price of tea in China.The bible does say to obey the law of the land. Be as specific as I was.

We agree that there cannot be political party, government, country, etc tied to Christianity. The cross of Christ cannot be combined with anything else. It stands alone.

From a pro Obama, politically skewed site:

con·serv·a·tive [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv]
1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

1: often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs
2: a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles

I am not a fundamentalist when it comes to God. I was raised as one. The bible must be read and interpreted in the light of history, people, geography, in that time. I do not believe it should be taken literally in all cases, as that is not how it is written. Some of it is poetry, some of it is not. We can't pick. The bible has to say what it says. If you want to define me as a fundy because I hold to the strict Gospel of Christ, you are misusing the word. God holds to that strict Gospel of Christ.

Unfortunately, like the Bible, the spirit of the message in the Constitution has been changed and misrepresented. Like the Bible, it states some things, clear and plain. Like the bible, it needs to be considered in context. Holding on to this document does not make me a fundamentalist. It makes me AN AMERICAN.
0 x

User avatar
p-freak
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1538
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:01 am
#1 Album: Unseen Power
Pethead since: 1992
Location: The Netherlands
x 66
Contact:

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by p-freak » Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:25 am

brent wrote:I am not discounting your faith. All I said was if you oppose those few things John and Jay hold to, you align yourself with an unbiblical, democrat, point of view. The unbiblical democrats believe in abortion, refusing people's rights to gather in public and pray, etc. Do you believe it is ok to murder babies and deny people rights given to them by their country's constitution/laws? I have heard Johns soap box sermons. There isn't anything unbiblical in what he says he believes about his country. John is anti-corruption. He is for the freedoms we are supposed to have. He is anti-oppression. He is for life. He is for peace. I just don't see how his views on things have adversely affected anyone. I don't see how singing some songs with a guy who has a radio ministry and active God-fearing legal team has to do with the price of tea in China.The bible does say to obey the law of the land. Be as specific as I was.

We agree that there cannot be political party, government, country, etc tied to Christianity. The cross of Christ cannot be combined with anything else. It stands alone.

From a pro Obama, politically skewed site:

con·serv·a·tive [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv]
1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

1: often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs
2: a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles

I am not a fundamentalist when it comes to God. I was raised as one. The bible must be read and interpreted in the light of history, people, geography, in that time. I do not believe it should be taken literally in all cases, as that is not how it is written. Some of it is poetry, some of it is not. We can't pick. The bible has to say what it says. If you want to define me as a fundy because I hold to the strict Gospel of Christ, you are misusing the word. God holds to that strict Gospel of Christ.

Unfortunately, like the Bible, the spirit of the message in the Constitution has been changed and misrepresented. Like the Bible, it states some things, clear and plain. Like the bible, it needs to be considered in context. Holding on to this document does not make me a fundamentalist. It makes me AN AMERICAN.
Thank you for your first sentence. I hold to the strict Gospel of Christ just as much as you do. That's makes us brothers and I'm glad for it. Maybe the word fundamentalist was not the right word in this context. As you point out, it's a confusing and misused word. I think in real life we'd have amazing debates over some beer/cognac and cigars/brandy and pipe/whatever you prefer.

John's political views have not adversely affected me. I just don't agree with them. The example you mention of social justice (tea in China) takes place in a country, far, far away, but I would be more concerned with what's going on in your backyard. When a single mom has to take two jobs to provide for her kids and then doesn't even have enough money to pay for their education, when the poor are considered to be poor because they are lazy and people believe it's their own fault, when the government is full of millionaires who are trying to secure their own interests instead of those of the people they supposedly serve, that's when social justice has gone wrong. Those are issues that you can't deal with on your own, those are political issues to fight for. Abortion is a horrible mistake and I can't imagine people would ever do that, but instead of keeping on about how it should be banned, why not right the social wrongs that drive people to abortion? Why not invest in education and job chances for those vulnerable groups that are most likely to fall into poverty? Forbidding abortion will make you feel good, but it won't solve the issues behind it. If people can't legally do it, then they'll find other ways. It's always better to convince people not to do something, because if you forbid them, they'll only want it more and do it behind your back. I have the same position on this issue as you have, but I believe that John and Jay and you and exe are wrong about the way to approach it.
0 x
Image

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4302
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 149

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by brent » Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:24 am

We cannot right social wrongs, or legislate people into morality. The law of the land makes people obey on the outside, for the common good of all until they get to a point where they can admit they are sinners in need of a savior. So, until people get there, we have to make it harder for people who make stupid mistakes from making those mistakes.
0 x

User avatar
Mountain Man
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1387
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2003 9:11 pm
#1 Album: Wake-Up Call
Pethead since: 1983
x 266

Re: New take on Never Been Any Reason

Post by Mountain Man » Sun Oct 20, 2013 7:07 pm

p-freak wrote:I have no objections against John working with Sekulow on some music. I don't know much about Sekulow and I don't want to know much about him. My impression is that he has connections in some way with the political conservative right. That's his choice and even if I fundamentally would disagree with him, it's not my business and it would never be a reason not to listen to these Sekulow and Friends recordings. Probably nothing wrong with the guy other than that I disagree with him.

For me the issue is about John working with Sekulow. I don't care about John's political opinion and I don't want him to express that through his music. I'm sure that John will have biblical reasons to justify his political point of view, but being a Christian doesn't oblige you to find your political home where he's found it. I happen to use the same bible and come to a completely different conclusion. So I don't like it when John is putting out his political opinion through his ministry, because I only care about his music and absolutely not about his political views. (This is all based on only two of John's songs: The Cross Remains - in the context of The Export DVD - and Faith & Freedom, so I usually choose to skip those two songs.)

It's amazing that the Riker boys got this chance to sing and perform with John! I can imagine it's a dream come true.
I have no problem with artists expressing their opinions regardless of subject in their work. Why shouldn't they? I might disagree with their opinions, but I have no problem with them expressing it.
0 x

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests