Oz Fox and the Highway to Hell

[brent]

If someone is truly following Christ then why in this World would they want to hide it?

Christ will use those who seek him in what they do.

God uses everything, not just believers. We are to be the hands and feet of Christ. We are not the only instrument he uses....thank God. God used plenty of animals and lost people in the bible to do his bidding.

Who is hiding being a follower of Christ? Is there a list of acceptable actions one must check off to demonstrate that they are a believer? How can one make an honest assumption about another persons faith and dedication without knowing them and being exposed to their fruit or the lack thereof? Isn't this a bit judgmental and legalistic?

[bakersfieldpethead]

Not really. God can't use someone who isn't willing to be used of Him. That's just fact.
You can't make someone do something they don't want to do.

[brent]

God using someone is not God using them to make them do something they do not want to do. However, I will throw up Jonah for consideration. Jonah did not want to do what God wanted. God made his life hell. Jonah gave in. What about Judas, a devil? God used Judas. What about the Sanhedrin, the Roman soldiers, the crowd of Jews that screamed, "Crucify him!"? All used by God to bring about his purpose.

It IS true that God uses people that are not believers. God works all things together for HIS good. Did you forget about Egypt and it's effect on Israel? God used a nation of lost pagan people to bring HIS judgment on Israel. The bible is FULL of people being used to bring about his will without their knowledge. He uses them to work in their life, and the lives of believers. God also blesses the unbelievers without their knowledge. God loves them and cares for them.

[zak89]

Gee Brent, you gotta get a blog man! You've got some really deep insight that deserves to be more accessible to the "masses".

Seriously, I agree with you so much I literally forgot what I originally disagreed with.

Not really. God can't use someone who isn't willing to be used of Him. That's just fact.
You can't make someone do something they don't want to do.

I understand the sentiment here, but - well, what Brent said. Seriously, I don't think we say that God "can't" do anything (well, there actually a caveat to be made there, but I digress) - He uses "unwilling" people to accomplish His will all the time. I say this carefully for fear of starting a soteriological debate, but IMO the amazing thing about God's sovereignty is His ability to take free, unreliable and often unwilling agents and use them to accomplish His will every time - it's one thing to lay out the puppets and strings and run the whole show (heh - I could do that!) - it's another to take something as unpredictable and fickle as the human race and get anything done, let alone a complete story line.

[CatNamedManny]

As for the comment that against me, because I do not like some of the sappy Christian entertainment...I would pay more attention if it was real world and had less cheese. So much of it is unrealistic. It presents a perfect dreamworld. Sometimes it is watered down and bland. Often, as the well versed Tod Agnew points out, this music makes liars out of people. It is not REAL. Some of it is unscriptural. I like music that is real. How dare you judge me and think that I do not "think on these things". I do...daily. It doesn't mean that I must sing about them in a way that you agree with. There is more than one way to say something and different people need to hear it different ways to relate to it.

There are some Christian musicians making an impact on people's lives, living out their faith, working out their salvation, in front of their piers. That is scriptural. Some of these people are not the voice of their band. Some of them are. For me, I must say it like it is. I cannot waste the chance. We all have different giftings and callings. To say that some musician MUST say certain things a certain way and MUST perform "Christian" music that fits your formula is absurd.

I think you must have misunderstood what I was saying because a lot of this is needlessly defensive.

There is plenty of good Christian music that is not cheesy and is real world, etc. You know that obviously. The point here is that there is very little secular music that is worth listening to.

I'm not judging you or saying anything about what you choose to listen to; I was responding to what appeared to be your attitude toward those of us who choose to listen only to Christian music, calling such actions "creepy." As I said before, I may have misunderstood that post, but I guess not, based on this response.

And I'm not sure if you're responding to me with the rest of it, but I agree with you on all that, so you're probably addressing someone else.

And, for the record, I am not a Stryper fan, though that's mostly because I don't like Michael Sweet's vocals, and I've never been a big fan of how cheesy a lot of their lyrics are/were.

A band cannot be Christian. Music cannot be Christian. Christian means "follower of Christ". A band (as an organization) cannot follow Christ. Music cannot follow Christ. The individual members of a band can follow Christ. I think the proper terminology would be "Christian themed band" or "Christian themed music".

We can focus on semantics or we can have a conversation within the confines of the terms as we all know and understand them. I'm choosing to have the conversation, even if I agree with you on the technical logistics of the terminology. When a band sings unambiguously about the Christian lifestyle or Christ himself, as Demon Hunter, Staple, Project, etc., do (I'm not a Switchfoot fan, so I don't know much about their lyrics or message, except I relate quite a bit to "Mess of Me," which is probably the best song of theirs I've ever heard), then they are unambiguously Christian bands. This is what their fans see them as, what radio stations see them as, and what people in the secular industry see them as. I doubt many of them have answered fully the question, "Are you a Christian band?" because the answer is very obvious. What they choose to classify themselves as may comport well with the technical definitions you have espoused, but as I said, that's a distinction without a difference; it's a semantic game that doesn't really do anything to address the questions involved about lyrical content and what is appropriate for a Christian to listen to.

On that last score, I'm in complete agreement with Jonathan. And besides, I can get my news, traffic and weather from NPR without being assaulted by the likes of Lady Gaga or Nickelback.

[separateunion]

Not really. God can't use someone who isn't willing to be used of Him. That's just fact.
You can't make someone do something they don't want to do.

How about God hardening Pharaoh's heart? God isn't very sovereign if he doesn't have complete control to do as he please.

[separateunion]

Here's what Andrew Schwab, lead singer of Project 86, said when asked if they were a Christian band:

"We're not going to go in there and say 'Hey we're the Christian band.'" stated Schwab in a 2004 interview. "We're going to carry ourselves like a normal band. Hopefully people will like our music and investigate into the band [...] and they will learn our beliefs." In a 2007 interview, he further opined "We always tell people that the goal has been to just write music that we love, and write music hopefully that is challenging and inspiring to people and doesn't sound like everything else out there."

[separateunion]

What they choose to classify themselves as may comport well with the technical definitions you have espoused, but as I said, that's a distinction without a difference; it's a semantic game that doesn't really do anything to address the questions involved about lyrical content and what is appropriate for a Christian to listen to.

I pretty much listen to anything. I've never really found a song that I felt made me stumble. However, I know some people have an issue with certain lyrics. I think in this case, the proper way to look at lyrics is righteous/unrighteous not Christian/secular. There are plenty of "Christian" bands with unrighteous lyrics and plenty of mainstream artists with righteous lyrics.

[bakersfieldpethead]

Here's what Andrew Schwab, lead singer of Project 86, said when asked if they were a Christian band:

"We're not going to go in there and say 'Hey we're the Christian band.'" stated Schwab in a 2004 interview. "We're going to carry ourselves like a normal band. Hopefully people will like our music and investigate into the band [...] and they will learn our beliefs." In a 2007 interview, he further opined "We always tell people that the goal has been to just write music that we love, and write music hopefully that is challenging and inspiring to people and doesn't sound like everything else out there."

If that’s what they want to do, that’s between them and God. With my music I choose not to hide the fact that I’m singing about Christ. I don’t profess to be anything else other than a follower of Christ. My goal isn’t to win the acceptance of the World; Christ said that the World will hate us because they hate Him. As a Christian we are not supposed to be seeking the acceptance of the World because they generally pick sin above all things.

We seek to bring souls into the kingdom,
So what do we have to offer someone for a better road to choose, if we’re no different then they are?
What is there to respect if you constantly compromise what you believe in, in order to have acceptance of the general public?

The idea of “don’t say Jesus, or we can’t reach those people for Him” is completely opposite of what Christ told us to do.

[CatNamedManny]

What they choose to classify themselves as may comport well with the technical definitions you have espoused, but as I said, that's a distinction without a difference; it's a semantic game that doesn't really do anything to address the questions involved about lyrical content and what is appropriate for a Christian to listen to.

I pretty much listen to anything. I've never really found a song that I felt made me stumble. However, I know some people have an issue with certain lyrics. I think in this case, the proper way to look at lyrics is righteous/unrighteous not Christian/secular. There are plenty of "Christian" bands with unrighteous lyrics and plenty of mainstream artists with righteous lyrics.

I think that's fair enough. Certainly it's a matter between each person and God, as I think I've said before. I think your construct is more accurate than mine, but I don't have the energy to fight the prevailing use of the phrases already widely in use.

Interesting quotes from Project 86. They sound vaguely familiar, so I probably read them elsewhere a long time ago. But this band's latest album also has lyrics like:

He looked into my eyes, all he saw was conviction
Dropping the blade to the earth
I said, “How could you think that I’d ever retreat?
You know that I’m already dead.”

I said "Hit me now
and we’ll see where it leads
Cut me out if you think I will bleed
Strike me down If you think you’re a man
Cause I know that you don't understand"

There is no weapon
There is no blade
You wonder why I’m not afraid?
There is no weapon
There is no blade
You’ll never kill Him that lives inside of me.

So as I said, a band can say what they want about how they consider themselves and what that means for their own artistic integrity. But how I -- and pretty much everyone else -- consider them is based on their lyrics, and their lyrics are pretty straightforward to me, and that's why I consider them a "Christian band."

[rexreed]

I think my favorite Stryper album is Reborn. It's a bit different than the music from their heyday but I feel like lyrically and musically it is the strongest in their catalog. Murder by Pride was good, too but it was a "safe" album and didn't stray much from the mold. I really can't wait for the next album, and I dislike most of the artists they are covering. The thing is, when Stryper does the music I like it. It is also neat to hear their version of music that influenced them.

[separateunion]

I think the last Project 86 is the only one that may have some blatantly Christian lyrics. However, it's also by far their worst. When they were at their peak, they were singing about some pretty dark stuff. You'd be hard pressed to find Christian themes on "Truthless Heroes".

[CatNamedManny]

Yeah, they were in a pretty dark place when they made that album; they were on the cusp of major crossover success then had a major falling out with their record label and everything fell apart. Releasing that album didn't help things; their fans weren't happy with it either. I look at it as the band members perhaps growing up a little bit through that experience.

Their self-titled, Drawing Black Lines, ...And the Rest Will Follow all have pretty overt Christian/spiritual lyrics. Truthless Heroes is the only album that really doesn't, but while it's dark in tone, there's also not anything in there that I find objectionable. As for musically, I think Rival Factions is easily their worst. Picket Fence Cartel I enjoy quite a bit, both lyrically and musically.

[bakersfieldpethead]

I find that the best albums come out of those who have went through some trials before they recorded the album. Sometimes you can't reach someone unless you've been through the same thing.

[BTRPETRAGeorge]

I cant believe that these guys who claim to be "christian" would actually go as far as covering (as they call it their, musical influences), when clearly these bands stood for nothing more then sexual immorality and the occult!!!
Shame on them for doing this, don't they realize that in an effort to honor the bands that have influenced them they are at the same time actually promoting them and with that the rebelious evil image and behaviour that these bands stood for???



BTRPETRAGeorge

.......................................................................
Be Reformed By being Transformed through the Word!!