My grandparents believed Elvis was of the Devil. My parents believe Marilyn Manson is of the Devil. I'm pretty sure Lady Gaga IS the Devil. And probably, my great-grandparents thought, Oh I don't know, Lawerence Welk was the spawn of Satan. Every generation latches onto one or two artists as symbols of the inevitable apocalypse to come. If Will.I.am isn't enough evidence for you, then you are one of those fabled eternal optimists.
This essay is about music. I've been working on this one for awhile. The original tone has changed because I am attempting to ease up on the combative rhetoric that I'm so used to. That said, I do feel the need to explain a few things, in the name of self-awareness.
I am a music snob. That's being polite; I am more accurately a music jerk. I like what I like and hate most of everything else, and I think everyone else should hate everything I hate with equal passion. So, I'm going to say things in the paragraphs to come that will sound like universal absolutes that are, in fact, only matters of opinion. And I don't think the people with differing opinions are stupid, evil or unpatriotic. I just think those people are wrong. And that's okay. Let's get started.
When I was fifteen, I had an experience at one of my many church camps, I can't remember if it was Galilee or Happening, that led me to make the decision that God wanted me to give up all secular forms of art, including music. So, I sold all my cd's, changed my presets and attempted to purge my life from the Satanic influence of secular music. Of course, when I was fifteen I ALSO thought it was a great idea to wear 7 cross necklaces at a time and big, black Buddy Holly-style glasses. (that's right, I did it first, Hipsters)
Here's what I learned from my self-sacrificial fast from non-Christian music: Christian music is TERRIBLE! (@ Andy Bryan et al, this excludes Handel, Isaac Watts and, of course, Charles Wesley) And it hasn't gotten any better. It's still terrible. Musically, artistically, poetically, theologically. Terrible.
Before you churchy folks get all up in my grill, do something for me. Listen to the worst thing Pearl Jam ever did, which is a toss-up between the albums No Code and Binaural, and then listen to Audio Adrenaline's greatest hits. Listen to the worst thing Dave Matthews Band ever did, which is clearly Busted Stuff, then listen to the best song David Crowder Band ever put out. Jack Johnson and Shane and Shane (not really the same other than acoustic guitars, but I couldn't think of anything else). Mariah Carey and Amy Grant. Jay-Z and T-Bone or whoever the Christian rapper is. There's no comparison! Christian artists are simply and (again, in my opinion, so relax) CLEARLY just not as good.
Beyond a question of personal taste, Christian music is musically, poetically and theologically immature. Please write something that's not DAG or CFG. And, okay already, I get it, "Love" rhymes with "Above". Any images of God other than King or Shepherd? Music fans: expand your horizons. Musicians: write better worship music!
Now, I'm no musical genius. (At least on guitar, I mean, I have been playing drums for 90% of my life) I know how hard it is to write words without using "He" or "Him" language and have it 1. make sense and 2. sound good. I know how hard it is to write songs with more than three chords that a congregation can sing. I know how hard it is to write thoughtfully theological songs that are also catchy. It's hard. But can we please offer more to musical history than Jars of Clay or Switchfoot? Are these really the best we can do?
A deeper question than just my music-snoberific dislike for the sounds of Christian music is this admittedly non-pervasive attitude among some Christians that anything outside the Christian community is all evil and can't possibly have anything to do with the voice of God. I got in trouble once for talking about Harry Potter in a children's sermon 'cause wizards are evil. What's interesting is that believing that wizards are evil necessitates believing that wizards are REAL. Come on, people.
Don't put any limits on what, who, when, where or how God can use the things in this world to speak to us. I have felt the presence of God in a church camp worship experience AND at a Tool concert. I have heard God speak through Eric Clapton's guitar, Bob Dylan's words and Metallica's pyrotechnics!
The point is not that Christian music sucks, pardon my french, even though it does! I just want to make a plea: please don't lock your children in a cave of over-protection and deny them the life-changing experience of Elvis Presley, The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Black Keys and, yes, even the Harry Potter movies because they aren't explicitly Christian. It works a couple ways: putting limits on how God speaks and putting limits on the experiences that make up a full life.
Don't limit yourself and don't limit God. And, please, don't tell me that Harry Potter is taking all our children to hell in a handbasket.
Recommendations: (excluding the obvious)
Heavy rock: Clutch
Normal rock: Band of Horses, Kings of Leon, Black Keys, My Morning Jacket
Country rock: anything that has anything to do with Buddy Miller or T. Bone Burnett, Wilco, Conor Oberst/Bright Eyes
Just miles, leagues, fathoms above anything that's happening in the Christian music world.
Peace, B
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Friday, January 7, 2011
The Letdown
The tree has been kicked to the curb, shoved in the closet or sunk in the pond. The lights have been retangled. And, most disturbing to my friend EC, the soft rock stations are back to playing the NOT Christmas Mariah Carey songs. It's over. 12 days. Done. And it's not like there's anything excited coming up. Yay! Presidents' Day!
It is complicated to live in the space between "every word of Scripture is absolutely true" and "the Bible is bogus" during the Christmas season. On the one hand, there is no Christianity without Christmas. No faith at all. The incarnation (in-carn-ation; becoming in-fleshed) is a necessary component of the process of salvation. The incarnation is irrational. The divine becomes human-it is totally wild, but, by definition, faith has to be part irrational. On the other hand, magic stars? Pregnant virgins?
And then there's the Scripture itself. Two gospels give the birth story, two do not. The two that do, Matthew and Luke, hardly agree on any detail.
Matthew: Angel appears to Joseph, no census, no inn, no manger, no animals. The story of Herod's pursuit of the King of the Jews. The visit of the "wise men", no number of men, just number of gifts, and no "kings".
Luke: Angels appear to Mary, Mary's friend (not brother or uncle), and the shepherds. This is the census, trip to Bethlehem, the inn and the manger (still no animals).
Neither version lists December 25th as Jesus' birthday, probably because the calender we use today didn't exist.
The truth (remember: I whole-heartedly believe the truth of Scripture, just not the facts) we can take from the birth narratives given in the Bible is Jesus is the incarnation of God (Word, Logos, Christ) born for the salvation of the Jews and Gentiles alike, of all people, rich and poor, everybody! Matthew is very concerned with sharing the Gospel with the Hebrew people AND the Gentiles (non-Hebrew people), which is why he included the "wise men from the East", probably not of Jewish heritage. Luke is principally concerned with bringing the Gospel to the marginalized people, the poor, the women, which is why he included the shepherds and conversations between Mary and Elizabeth.
So, conclusion number one: Jesus was clearly born (we have sources outside the Bible that speak of a powerful prophet and leader named Jesus from the same time as the Bible says he lived), probably in Joseph's hometown Bethlehem, and probably not on December 25th. Jesus is the incarnate Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of the world, the whole world, east to west, wise men to poor shepherds. (This is the belief part) Christmas is a celebration and commemoration of the power of God's grace through the incarnation.
I've been thinking about The Letdown. That moment when we wake up and realize that Christmas is over and it is, in fact, still winter.
I think the letdown is primarily because the cultural, secular Christmas season goes away. The Santas, the elves, the radio stations...it all just stops. And we've been bombarded with the Santa and Rudolph version of Christmas everywhere we go since the day after Halloween and then...it's gone. Still winter, still cold, still grey, but not Christmas.
But there's no date in the Biblical accounts of the Christmas story and there's no end to the incarnation. The incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth is not an event that happened. Just like the Christian church has taken the celebration of Easter and created symbols of the resurrection every Sunday morning (set up as "little Easters" by the early church) and really with every new sunrise, maybe it's time that we remember the birth of Jesus, and with it the incarnation, all year round. Every day you wake up as a human being, you are a celebration of the incarnation. Every second of every day that human beings walk in this world, we are connected to the kingdom of the divine through the full personhood and full divinity of Jesus.
So conclusion number two: the incarnation-not the mixture of two Biblical accounts, early Christian traditional accounts and totally fictional...um...fiction accounts-but the mystic, mysterious, infinitely powerful TRUE incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth is eternal. The inevitable letdown that comes after the Christmas season is understandable in cultural terms, but in spiritual, theological, ecclesiological (church-y) terms, it's kind of not needed.
Live your Christian, Christmas, incarnational identity every second of every day.
Merry Christmas, Brad
P.S. I was hoping I was easing into this kind of thinking, but I've already lost a reader after one essay. If you disagree, disagree. But ask me why I think the way I think and, please, understand why you believe what you believe. Also, I miss my seminary community and the conversations we had, so PLEASE guys, ENGAGE!
It is complicated to live in the space between "every word of Scripture is absolutely true" and "the Bible is bogus" during the Christmas season. On the one hand, there is no Christianity without Christmas. No faith at all. The incarnation (in-carn-ation; becoming in-fleshed) is a necessary component of the process of salvation. The incarnation is irrational. The divine becomes human-it is totally wild, but, by definition, faith has to be part irrational. On the other hand, magic stars? Pregnant virgins?
And then there's the Scripture itself. Two gospels give the birth story, two do not. The two that do, Matthew and Luke, hardly agree on any detail.
Matthew: Angel appears to Joseph, no census, no inn, no manger, no animals. The story of Herod's pursuit of the King of the Jews. The visit of the "wise men", no number of men, just number of gifts, and no "kings".
Luke: Angels appear to Mary, Mary's friend (not brother or uncle), and the shepherds. This is the census, trip to Bethlehem, the inn and the manger (still no animals).
Neither version lists December 25th as Jesus' birthday, probably because the calender we use today didn't exist.
The truth (remember: I whole-heartedly believe the truth of Scripture, just not the facts) we can take from the birth narratives given in the Bible is Jesus is the incarnation of God (Word, Logos, Christ) born for the salvation of the Jews and Gentiles alike, of all people, rich and poor, everybody! Matthew is very concerned with sharing the Gospel with the Hebrew people AND the Gentiles (non-Hebrew people), which is why he included the "wise men from the East", probably not of Jewish heritage. Luke is principally concerned with bringing the Gospel to the marginalized people, the poor, the women, which is why he included the shepherds and conversations between Mary and Elizabeth.
So, conclusion number one: Jesus was clearly born (we have sources outside the Bible that speak of a powerful prophet and leader named Jesus from the same time as the Bible says he lived), probably in Joseph's hometown Bethlehem, and probably not on December 25th. Jesus is the incarnate Son of God, the Messiah, the Savior of the world, the whole world, east to west, wise men to poor shepherds. (This is the belief part) Christmas is a celebration and commemoration of the power of God's grace through the incarnation.
I've been thinking about The Letdown. That moment when we wake up and realize that Christmas is over and it is, in fact, still winter.
I think the letdown is primarily because the cultural, secular Christmas season goes away. The Santas, the elves, the radio stations...it all just stops. And we've been bombarded with the Santa and Rudolph version of Christmas everywhere we go since the day after Halloween and then...it's gone. Still winter, still cold, still grey, but not Christmas.
But there's no date in the Biblical accounts of the Christmas story and there's no end to the incarnation. The incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth is not an event that happened. Just like the Christian church has taken the celebration of Easter and created symbols of the resurrection every Sunday morning (set up as "little Easters" by the early church) and really with every new sunrise, maybe it's time that we remember the birth of Jesus, and with it the incarnation, all year round. Every day you wake up as a human being, you are a celebration of the incarnation. Every second of every day that human beings walk in this world, we are connected to the kingdom of the divine through the full personhood and full divinity of Jesus.
So conclusion number two: the incarnation-not the mixture of two Biblical accounts, early Christian traditional accounts and totally fictional...um...fiction accounts-but the mystic, mysterious, infinitely powerful TRUE incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth is eternal. The inevitable letdown that comes after the Christmas season is understandable in cultural terms, but in spiritual, theological, ecclesiological (church-y) terms, it's kind of not needed.
Live your Christian, Christmas, incarnational identity every second of every day.
Merry Christmas, Brad
P.S. I was hoping I was easing into this kind of thinking, but I've already lost a reader after one essay. If you disagree, disagree. But ask me why I think the way I think and, please, understand why you believe what you believe. Also, I miss my seminary community and the conversations we had, so PLEASE guys, ENGAGE!
My Motivations
I have been asked about my reasons for doing this. Both the blog in general and the specific voice of these essays. It's pretty simple.
1. To engage my mind, heart, soul and strength in something other than gas station sandwiches and heavy metal drumming.
2. To speak to the people, as I believe the thousands of people, who have rejected or are rejecting the gospel based on the thought that it's either Pat Robertson or it's not Christian.
3. To answer the couple people who I care about very much who have told me I should get back to writing.
And why a blog? Why make it so public and not just do a devotional and a journal? Because it keeps me accountable. As things stand right now, I do not have a church home. Doing these little essays will afford me the opportunity to crack open the Bible and contemplate stuff. So, even if you disagree with every word I say and think I'm a nut, if you don't see a post every week, call me on it.
Anyway, on to business...
1. To engage my mind, heart, soul and strength in something other than gas station sandwiches and heavy metal drumming.
2. To speak to the people, as I believe the thousands of people, who have rejected or are rejecting the gospel based on the thought that it's either Pat Robertson or it's not Christian.
3. To answer the couple people who I care about very much who have told me I should get back to writing.
And why a blog? Why make it so public and not just do a devotional and a journal? Because it keeps me accountable. As things stand right now, I do not have a church home. Doing these little essays will afford me the opportunity to crack open the Bible and contemplate stuff. So, even if you disagree with every word I say and think I'm a nut, if you don't see a post every week, call me on it.
Anyway, on to business...
Friday, December 31, 2010
Genesis
During the Republican debate of the 2008 presidential election, the panel was asked to raise hands signifying the rejection of the theory of evolution and the full acceptance of creationism as the origin of this wide wild world of ours. 4 candidates raised their hands. FOUR! One of them has become the most powerful political person in the state of Kansas, a state that's already got an abysmal record in supporting science, despite all those fossils and glacial plains and so on and so forth. Let's be clear-these folks were running for the, at least at the time until China decides to call in their debtors, most powerful person in the world prize! Adults, who I suppose care very much about the future of their children, are fighting tooth and nail to get creationism taught as an equal alternative to evolution...not in a religious theory class or history or myths, but in SCIENCE. The only thing that's going to accomplish is the raising of an entire generation of people who are a least a little bit stupid. (And, yes, if you're a functioning adult human being and a full-fledged, six-day, Adam named all the animals creationist, I think you're, at least a little bit, stupid.)
ENOUGH! 6, 24 hour periods, 4,000 years ago? Seriously? Unless you've been living under a rock-well, actually, rocks are millions of years old, so...-if you've been paying attention even at the full extent of our Twitter, ring tone attention spans, you HAVE to realize the world is more than the 6,000 years or whatever the creationist math works out to be. Can the president of the United States of America really not think dinosaurs are real? No.
Here are the problems:
Big bang and evolution are only "theories" outside the scientific community.
It's not just about the world: we are a world in a solar system in a galaxy in an infinitely expanding universe.
There are trees older than the biblical age of the world.
There are TWO accounts of the creation of humankind and they are VERY different!
Have I mentioned dinosaurs?
This year we mapped the genome of a 35,000 year old Neanderthal bone. Adam says, "What the hell's a genome?"
Oh, beeteedub, who wrote it down?
And finally, where would we be without The Flintstones, the Land Before Time movies, the B.C. comic strip, the Geico cavemen, Jurassic Park or that Saturday morning show Dinosaurs?!
I hope that you have come to a place secure enough in your faith to understand that a rejection of creationism is not a denial of the existentially creative power of God.
So, what do we do? What does a rational person of faith do with the story of creation from Genesis?
I chose Genesis as my...uh...genesis because it seems to be the easiest way to start a conversation toward a rational faith. This marks the thrust of all the arguments to come: rejecting the statements of the Bible as scientific fact does not diminish the power of the Bible as mythical truth. To continue, the gentle reader will need to understand that I believe in the difference between truth and fact.
God created the heavens and the earth. Truth. God created the heavens and the earth in six, 24-hour days. Not fact.
It is the very complexities and intricacies of our universe that simultaneously prove to me 1. Creationism is a myth and 2. A divine Creative Being is the source of all we know and all we have yet to discover. There is simply no way that a world, a universe, a human body, a human mind, an animal kingdom as diverse, as beautiful, as creative as ours happened at random. But there's no way it happened in six days, either.
A possible translation of the well-known first lines of the Bible is, "In the beginning, when God BEGAN creating the heavens and the earth." God's creative powers are eternal, from the beginning to the end; God created, is creating and will create. The myth of Creation tells the story of God's creative power. That's the point, God's creative power. It's not science, it's faith, and no, KANSAS, it should not be taught in school.
At the end of each figurative, metaphorical day, the recorder of Genesis tells us that the Almighty Creator looked (looks?) upon the creation and saw that it was good. And it is. VERY good. The mountains, the oceans, the rivers, the fish, the birds, the animals (especially dogs) and the humans (especially women). It is all very good, my friends. The science, the genomes, the universe, the black holes, the atoms, the dinosaurs (did you know triceratops is just the baby version of another dinosaur? Like Pluto's not a planet!). It is all very good. And it all, from the first fish to climb out of the ooze to catch some fresh air to the next evolutionary step-quite clearly Justin Beiber-WAS CREATED BY GOD.
The Creation story of Genesis is a mythical account of the creative power of the Almighty and the goodness of creation in the eyes of the Creator. Denying evolution doesn't make you more faithful; it makes you blindly-faithful. Look around. It is very good.
Brad
ENOUGH! 6, 24 hour periods, 4,000 years ago? Seriously? Unless you've been living under a rock-well, actually, rocks are millions of years old, so...-if you've been paying attention even at the full extent of our Twitter, ring tone attention spans, you HAVE to realize the world is more than the 6,000 years or whatever the creationist math works out to be. Can the president of the United States of America really not think dinosaurs are real? No.
Here are the problems:
Big bang and evolution are only "theories" outside the scientific community.
It's not just about the world: we are a world in a solar system in a galaxy in an infinitely expanding universe.
There are trees older than the biblical age of the world.
There are TWO accounts of the creation of humankind and they are VERY different!
Have I mentioned dinosaurs?
This year we mapped the genome of a 35,000 year old Neanderthal bone. Adam says, "What the hell's a genome?"
Oh, beeteedub, who wrote it down?
And finally, where would we be without The Flintstones, the Land Before Time movies, the B.C. comic strip, the Geico cavemen, Jurassic Park or that Saturday morning show Dinosaurs?!
I hope that you have come to a place secure enough in your faith to understand that a rejection of creationism is not a denial of the existentially creative power of God.
So, what do we do? What does a rational person of faith do with the story of creation from Genesis?
I chose Genesis as my...uh...genesis because it seems to be the easiest way to start a conversation toward a rational faith. This marks the thrust of all the arguments to come: rejecting the statements of the Bible as scientific fact does not diminish the power of the Bible as mythical truth. To continue, the gentle reader will need to understand that I believe in the difference between truth and fact.
God created the heavens and the earth. Truth. God created the heavens and the earth in six, 24-hour days. Not fact.
It is the very complexities and intricacies of our universe that simultaneously prove to me 1. Creationism is a myth and 2. A divine Creative Being is the source of all we know and all we have yet to discover. There is simply no way that a world, a universe, a human body, a human mind, an animal kingdom as diverse, as beautiful, as creative as ours happened at random. But there's no way it happened in six days, either.
A possible translation of the well-known first lines of the Bible is, "In the beginning, when God BEGAN creating the heavens and the earth." God's creative powers are eternal, from the beginning to the end; God created, is creating and will create. The myth of Creation tells the story of God's creative power. That's the point, God's creative power. It's not science, it's faith, and no, KANSAS, it should not be taught in school.
At the end of each figurative, metaphorical day, the recorder of Genesis tells us that the Almighty Creator looked (looks?) upon the creation and saw that it was good. And it is. VERY good. The mountains, the oceans, the rivers, the fish, the birds, the animals (especially dogs) and the humans (especially women). It is all very good, my friends. The science, the genomes, the universe, the black holes, the atoms, the dinosaurs (did you know triceratops is just the baby version of another dinosaur? Like Pluto's not a planet!). It is all very good. And it all, from the first fish to climb out of the ooze to catch some fresh air to the next evolutionary step-quite clearly Justin Beiber-WAS CREATED BY GOD.
The Creation story of Genesis is a mythical account of the creative power of the Almighty and the goodness of creation in the eyes of the Creator. Denying evolution doesn't make you more faithful; it makes you blindly-faithful. Look around. It is very good.
Brad
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Out of Control
A Christian fundamentalist, who runs a camp to "cure" homosexuality, sends "missionaries" to Uganda to help that country get a death penalty for being gay. The governor of Kansas rejects the theory of evolution and, with it, DINOSAURS. Everything that comes out of Pat Robertson's mouth but, most recently, the earthquake that sent Haiti into a downward spiral of crises was God's punishment for the Haitian people's deal with the devil. The United Methodist Church passes, by only 50 votes beeteedub, the statement that "homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching."
When the Christian right doesn't speak out against the above, it's sad. When the Christian left doesn't, it's dangerous. A recent NPR story purported the death of the liberal movement. Death is a strong word. I'd say...failure. The liberal voice is failing. Some don't speak because they don't want to lose their jobs. Well, I've already lost mine and don't want it back. Others don't speak out of a commitment to "can't we all just get along" so deep that they consider as absolutely anathema ever uttering the words, "You're wrong." I've never been one to mince words.
And so, I launch Toward a Rational Faith. Selfishly, I need to return to the world of...um...what is it...thinking! And I decided to use my current journey of theological thought as far as it can go. What is my current journey of theological thought, I hear you ask? Well, here it is: Biblical literalism and fundamentalism has gotten out of control and there has to be a space between the world of blind faith and rational thought. This passe, soooo 2005 blog will explore that space.
Ground rules: I'm a social liberal, and all posts will come from that perspective. However, you would be surprised at how fiscally and politically conservative I am. Rational arguments against my points will be accepted, insults will not. I am arrogant, every blogger is a little bit, and opinionated. I believe my opinions are the right ones, otherwise they wouldn't be my opinions. Anyone can comment, but I'm going through the trouble of carefully editing the upcoming essays so as to keep the offense to a minimum. I ask that you do the same. Oh, one more, on this blog "'cause the Bible says so" does not count as a rational argument.
Coming up: creationism, providence, innovative theology, family values, socialism, homosexuality, "personal" Savior, grace, music.
Love God with all your heart, soul, strength and MIND.
Brad
When the Christian right doesn't speak out against the above, it's sad. When the Christian left doesn't, it's dangerous. A recent NPR story purported the death of the liberal movement. Death is a strong word. I'd say...failure. The liberal voice is failing. Some don't speak because they don't want to lose their jobs. Well, I've already lost mine and don't want it back. Others don't speak out of a commitment to "can't we all just get along" so deep that they consider as absolutely anathema ever uttering the words, "You're wrong." I've never been one to mince words.
And so, I launch Toward a Rational Faith. Selfishly, I need to return to the world of...um...what is it...thinking! And I decided to use my current journey of theological thought as far as it can go. What is my current journey of theological thought, I hear you ask? Well, here it is: Biblical literalism and fundamentalism has gotten out of control and there has to be a space between the world of blind faith and rational thought. This passe, soooo 2005 blog will explore that space.
Ground rules: I'm a social liberal, and all posts will come from that perspective. However, you would be surprised at how fiscally and politically conservative I am. Rational arguments against my points will be accepted, insults will not. I am arrogant, every blogger is a little bit, and opinionated. I believe my opinions are the right ones, otherwise they wouldn't be my opinions. Anyone can comment, but I'm going through the trouble of carefully editing the upcoming essays so as to keep the offense to a minimum. I ask that you do the same. Oh, one more, on this blog "'cause the Bible says so" does not count as a rational argument.
Coming up: creationism, providence, innovative theology, family values, socialism, homosexuality, "personal" Savior, grace, music.
Love God with all your heart, soul, strength and MIND.
Brad
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)