Stryper Interview

[ctoddb]

Petra and Stryper are two very different bands, obviously, yet I love both of them. Both bands had a tremendous impact on my life in the 80s when I was a teenager, and both bands continue to edify me.

Preacher, your convictions are not wrong, but maybe misguided or over-generalized. I love the new album, and you know what? I'm not backsliding in any way. And I think it's not fair to assume that the majority of Stryper's other Christian fans will backslide by listening to this album. Had they done this in the 80s, when they had a bunch of impressionable teenagers following their every move, then maybe I could see your point (and as I said earlier, in my personal opinion the lyrical content of Against The Law--"positive" though it may have been--was not what I would have advised Stryper to do and as I also said, the band admits they were not where they should have been spiritually during that period. And it was apparent that God took His blessing away from the band at that point--bad album sales, record company going bankrupt, the band breaking up, etc). But most of Stryper's fans are mature, grown adults now. And Stryper's recent lyrical content (2003-now) are MUCH more spiritually mature and scripture-based! In fact, I would paint the broad brush the OTHER way than you and say that probably MOST of Stryper's Christian fans are not going to backslide because they listen to this new album. Just my opinion, of course.

My point is, Scripture is clear that if the Holy Spirit tells YOU to avoid listening to the album, then maybe you would be in danger of backsliding. But Paul taught in I Corinthians 8 that some things are OK for some, but not OK for others (regarding food sacrificed to idols). Back then, some Christians felt convicted that it was wrong to eat that food because it reminded them of their former ways. Paul said, "You're right; don't eat it or you could go back to idolatry." Others in Corinth said, "What's the big deal? Idols don't represent real gods, I need to eat to survive, and I'm not literally worshiping idols by eating this food." To them, Paul said, "You're right; you're not committing idolatry by eating this food. BUT...don't rub it in the faces of your brothers who feel differently."

There was a guy in one of my college classes back in the late 80s who was a Christian. He saw me wearing a Stryper shirt and asked me if I was a Christian. We hit it off for a few days until he began telling me about all the "satanic" influences on Stryper, and how they were deceivers, etc, and he advised me to stop listening to them lest I head down the wicked path. At first he really bothered me, but then I read that passage in I Corinthians and had compassion on him. Maybe for him, who might have grown up listening to secular rock which led him to a form of "idolatry" and bad behavior, the Holy Spirit said, "Stryper looks and sounds too much like those other bands you used to listen to; avoid them so you can remain pure." That's totally fine. That doesn't mean Stryper is a bad influence on ME or countless others! To the contrary, Stryper helped SAVE my soul to the point that after devouring page after page of interviews in SECULAR rock magazines, and memorizing their (admittedly "shallower") lyrics back then, I asked Jesus into my heart. Was that salvation any less valid because it was these "weak" brothers who led me to Him? I think not!

Like I said, Stryper have certainly made their fair share of mistakes. This newest album really isn't one of them, in my opinion. By the way, have you even heard or read the lyrics to the one original song on there, "God"? One of their boldest and most-convicting songs EVER! Nevertheless, they are brothers in ministry who just do things differently than maybe you would, but what will you say to the thousands who become Stryper fans because of this new album, who end up giving their lives to Jesus because they listen to the lyrics to "God" or Stryper's other albums from the 80s? Of course you would welcome them into the Kingdom! So let Stryper be Stryper and let other Christian bands do ministry the way the Lord has called them to do it. BOTH Petra's and Stryper's ministry styles are valid!

Love you guys and thanks for tolerating me! I am a Pethead too!

[Preacherman777]

First let me say that I agree that Stryper seemed to have matured in their lyrics on more recent albums and yes, I have heard and do own the new song "God". It's an excellent song. I also bought the song "Carry On Wayward Son" but that maybe why the rest of this album has really thrown me for a loop. It seems out of character for who this band now seems to be. Had they done this around the time of ATL is would not have shocked me, though it still would have disappointed me. I really didn't think they were in a place now where they would do something like this.

I also agree that their fans these days are not teenagers, but they are still people who love metal and who loved the music of these bands that are being covered on this album. So with that in mind, it does kind of lend to the idea that's it's ok to listen to this stuff, in spite of the fact that there's a lot of garbage in it. True, for most part, the songs covered on this album are not that bad, but these bands other songs are in many cases horrible and very offensive to the ways of God. Michael even said in a recent interview that they had considered doing some other songs that they eventually decided not to because the lyrics were pushing it too far. He even said they decided they better drop part of Heaven and Hell for the same reason. I mean if your dealing with songs and bands that you have to search for what you can cover because so much of it is bad, why would you want to cover such a band? Many of these bands are bands that I wouldn't listen to even before I got serious with God, just because they were that bad.

Now you mentioned 1 Cor. 8, but it would be also be good to consider what Paul says about the same basic subject in Romans 14 verses 20-22.

Romans 14:20-22
14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. 15 If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall. 22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves.

and even in 1 Cor. 8 it says something to the same effect.

9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? 11 So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall.

Now it seems to me that Stryper is throwing away these warnings and proudly doing what they believe they are free to do in spite of those whose walk might be damaged by it.

But the real question is, are we really even talking about a disputable matter? The way I see it, they are associating themselves with evil by covering the works of many of these bands. They are giving glory to the songs and to the bands themselves and lending a sense of approval to them and in that sense, the most applicable scripture may actually be 2 Corinthians 6:14-18

14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will live with them
and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they will be my people.”

17 Therefore,

“Come out from them
and be separate,
says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you.”

18 And,

“I will be a Father to you,
and you will be my sons and daughters,
says the Lord Almighty.”

[ctoddb]

Listen, everything you (Preacher) wrote, the way I read it, further underscores my point. So either we're not listening to each other (myself included), we are misunderstanding each other, or we'll just simply come to different conclusions based on our reading of scripture and our understanding of the Holy Spirit's leading.

Suffice it to say that I have no intention of beating a dead horse. I know who I am in Christ, and I have every reason to see the members of Stryper--as they are in 2011--as brothers toiling for the Lord, just as the members of Petra (Classic- or...whatever the other incarnation would be called!), Tourniquet, RED, Skillet, Christian comedians, Christian businessmen...I could go on and on. I just thought it was improper for some of us to be flippantly tossing accusations against Christian brothers. It didn't--and doesn't--seem right when coming from fellow Christians.

But I have definitely grown spiritually just by being part of this discussion, and I love and appreciate the spirits in which the most recent posts have been made. We are one in the bond of Love.

See you in other threads. In peace,
Todd Barnes <><

[gman]

I too was a bit disappointed that they did tihs album, but I do think there waas the practical, business side of things at play. If this was indeed the last album on their deal, it was something they could pull off fairly easily, it was expedient, and if it sells well, that helps them out with whatever deal they pursue for the next album.
Also, there is the matter of Christian liberty, and church and denominations define that differently. You could say there is a continuum from never causing anyone to stumble to anything goes, a practical non liberty to absolute liberty.

GMan

[brent]

Because I choose to view bands as bands and music as entertainment, the new Stryper record doesn't bother me that much. I have some Christian friends that are a bit set off by some of the covers, given the origins and originators of the songs, and what they meant when they were written. These tunes influenced the guys musicially, and so the guys want to play those tunes. Fine with me. Whatever. I think they were done well. Now, while the title is clever, my friends pionted out that they thought it referenced the work of Christ, when it refers to covers.

[neonpachyderm]

OK, I admit, I read the first page and part of the second...after that I started skimming. I bought _The Covering_ not long after it came out. I have no problem with a Christian band covering a secular song. (Petra did it, albeit with some lyrical changes, to Argent's "God Gave Rock and Roll to You.")

I have seen nothing in the LYRICS of the new Stryper album that cause me to be concerned. Most of the songs are simply about rock and roll. "Blackout" is the closest thing to concerning me, and even that isn't that big of a deal.

I don't think that covering someone else's song necessarily indicates condoning of that person's lifestyle. As an example, one of our ministry friends has used "For Those Tears I Died" (some lyrical quibbles with that one, but that's not the point.) Her singing that song doesn't indicate that she condones the author's lesbian lifestyle.

For this same reason, I can (and do) still play tracks from Ray Boltz and Jennifer Knapp. For that matter, how many Christian covers have been done of "Spirit in the Sky"? The author isn't a believer, but he wrote a good song.

[brent]

I agree with that post above. Good music is good music. People take everyday conversations and get something unintentional out of the words. People do that with sermons as well. A sermon topic may be about one thing but people might get another that speaks to them. A good song will be vague enough to be plug and play but still deliver the intended thought. Well, a commercial song for general consumption. The song will last longer as opposed to something people, topic and time sensitive.

In my mind, Christian bands should be by Christians for Christians, so Christians know what they are getting. A band that is evangelistic and is trying to reach the world, and get people to pay to be preached to, will not be able to call themselves a Christian band. I have no problems with that. Personally, I think all labels should be off. Music should be arranged by genre and not lyrical content. We only isolate Christian music apart from the world because of it's lyrical content and no other musical reason. Heck, that content sometimes gets the same label that the right wing nut politician's wives fought for in the 80s. (Remember, whatever you fight for to limit free speech will one day apply to you. We cannot pick and choose what is offensive because the people in control change.)

There are better Christian songs out there than Christians produce. That is my thought. Dylan, Johnny Cash, etc both hit people between the eyes with Jesus and nobody thought twice about it. A Christian does a cover and people freak. I don't like Stryper and I don't like the Christian connotation in their cover tune album title. But they do those songs well, and the bands who they have covered have given two thumbs up as a result. They captured the element of the tunes. THAT is how you cover a tune with respect.

[mkepethead]

Lyrics mean different things to different people. For example, Someone mentioned the song Blackout that songs lyrics makes me to never want to get drunk cause I don't want to feel the way the song discribes. Diffrent strokes for different folks.