Bezalel

Going to Baylor

2008-04-04T21:55:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I received an email from Baylor announcing that they will be accepting me into their Ph.D. in English program with funding. At this point they are not sure what kind of funding package they can offer me. They said it could range from a $17,000 stipend and tuition remission to only tuition remission. If I only receive tuition remission, however, I can reapply for full funding next year and I was told that it would be "highly likely" that I would receive a teaching assistantship. Since they Math department is giving Brittany a $23,000 stipend, we could survive in Waco for one year even if they don't give me a stipend at first--I'll just have to get a part-time job. We'll probably be leaving the AV sometime in late July or early August.

Part of what has been so remarkable about this entire process is the way God has shaped the events. While we were waiting to see what He had in store for us we couldn't understand why he would allow me to get so many rejection letters, or why He would let me send in transcripts late, but in retrospect it all makes sense. God allowed things to unfold in such a way that every single need was met, every concern was soothed, and every weakness was tried.

For example, when Brittany and I first began to discuss her seeking her Ph.D. at the same time as I was going to school I was seriously opposed. From my understanding of doctoral programs I could not imagine any way that both of us could go to school and maintain a healthy relationship. Although I was seriously concerned about this issue, we decided that Brittany should apply to five of the programs I was applying to in order to see what they could offer and how reasonable the workload would be.

When we visited Baylor, Brittany was informed that the first year or so of classes that she would take would be classes she had already taken at CSUN--she's overqualified. In other words, the workload (at least at first) would be completely reasonable. In addition, her Teaching Assistantship will only require her to teach one class per semester, while it provides $23,000 per year! This means that she'll hardly be working at all. Between her head start on the program, her more-than-reasonable teaching load, and the lack of a commute to school (unlike when she went to CSUN), it seems like we'll have more time together than when we were pursuing our Master degrees. God solved my concerns in a way I would never have imagined.

Second example, I applied to twelve programs and was outright rejected from nearly all of them. After I kept getting rejection letter after rejection letter I began to seriously wonder if I had been working towards the wrong goal, if maybe all my aspirations were misplaced and misguided, if maybe I didn't have what it took to get a Ph.D. after all. I got the the point where I could read a letter of rejection without even opening the envelope:

"Dear Mr. Noble, we are very thankful that you considered our program for your degree. Unfortunately, the graduate committee decided that they are unable to accept your application for admission at this time. We have received many applications this year and the committee was forced to reject many qualified applicants....."

Finally, my choices for grad school came down to the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, who could neither offer me funding nor hope for it in the future; UC Riverside, who hadn't accepted Brittany; UC Davis, who might have accepted me if some other applicant declined an offer; and Baylor still hadn't responded. I went to UC Riverside's open house on Wednesday and was overwhelmed with the fact that every single professor I encountered was exclusively studying some form of Theory (race, gender, post-colonial, deconstructionist, etc). In fact, one professor even bragged that he was a "Sophist." While the professors were all very kind, knowledgeable, and helpful, the reality was that I was (and am) not in any way interested in studying these approaches to literature. This was just not the program for me. I left Riverside thinking to myself that if this was the only school I could attend, I might not make it through the program at all; if I wasn't interested in what I was learning, how could I study intensely for five years? And considering that UC Davis is even more noted for their theoretical approaches to literature, I was forced to conclude that two of the schools I could attend would make me miserable. This left only Nebraska (and the thought of upwards of $15,000 in tuition debt--per year) and possibly Baylor. The very next day Baylor wrote me informing me of my acceptance.

At the time I saw all these rejection letters as defeats, as signs that I was making the wrong decision to pursue a Ph.D. and as signs that I was not a qualified student. And my experience at Riverside suggested to me that even if I did get accepted I wouldn't enjoy studying. But looking back I can see how God was closing doors so that I wouldn't ever be able to regret my decision to attend Baylor. You see, if I had been accepted to Iowa or Irvine with full funding, and then I turned them down to attend Baylor, I would always have wondered if I had "settled" or if I had picked the wrong school. Now I have nothing to regret and nothing to miss, and I know that most of the schools would have made me miserable anyway!

Finally, this experience made it clear to me that the glory belongs to God. About a month or so ago I realized that I forgot to send Baylor a transcript from a college. I had taken a few online classes on teaching classes online (confusing, I know) at a community college. Since these classes were not degree-related, I figured there was no point in my sending Baylor a transcript from the college. For some, foolish, reason, I put this community college on my application to Baylor, even though I wasn't planning on sending a transcript. It turns out that even though I sent my application in to Baylor weeks before the deadline, they were holding it until I sent them my transcript--and I had no idea. One day, after wondering why the English department was taking so long to get back to me, I stumbled across a page on Baylor's website which allowed me to check the status of my application--it told me that my application was on hold while they waited to receive the community college's transcript. Naturally, I freaked out, furious at myself for making such a silly mistake. I was convinced that my then late application would be turned down or at least that I would not be able to receive any funding. Looking back, I believe that God was allowing me to receive so many rejection letters and to mess-up my application to Baylor so that He could show that I had nothing to brag about. He brought me to a point where I was convinced that there was no way I could get accepted, and then He chose to bless me. What an awesome lesson in faith and humility!

Anyway, I'm sorry this was so long, but there's simply so much to share! We'll let you all know more as news becomes available.

-alan

Latest on Graduate School

2008-03-18T13:33:00.001-07:00

After a few weeks of fairly discouraging rejection letters, this week God blessed me with some good news.

First, Nebraska accepted me, although they couldn't offer me funding. They did say, however, that if another applicant declines a Teaching Assistantship I would receive a T.A. offer. I can also apply next year for the funding. My application to UNL was late due to some transcript fiasco, so it seems that they already send out their funding offers. The way they worded the letter suggested that if I had actually got the application in on time I would have received funding--which is frustrating to hear, but encouraging! Brittany has already been accepted by them into the Ph.D. in Math program--with full funding. So we are prayerfully considering going there even if they don't give me funding the first year. I could work and reapply for a TAship my second year. We'd probably have to get about 10-15k in debt, but since it's a good school and they'll likely give me funding my second year, it would would worth the investment.

UC Davis also sent me a letter, which I received today. They liked my application, but were unable to accept me yet. They placed me on their waiting list. If an applicant declines their offer, I'll receive full funding for five years to go there. From what I'm hearing, this is a great school, so it was an honor even to be placed on their waiting list! Unfortunately, Brittany didn't apply there (she only applied to the places I would likely get into and want to go to), so if we went to UC Davis she would have to wait a year to start her Ph.D. program.

Next week, Brittany and I are flying out to Baylor to check out the campus. I still have not received word from them either way, but I'm hoping that by visiting I'll win them over and they give me a fat funding offer.

Thanks for your prayers everyone. Here's the official tally so far:

Ohio: Rejected
Washington: Rejected
Illinois: Rejected
Iowa: Rejected
Indiana: Rejected
Emory: Rejected
Baylor: Application delayed over transcripts
Nebraska: Accepted without funding. Funding may become available
UC Davis: Placed on waiting list. Will be accepted with full funding if a space opens up.
Riverside: Accepted with "full" funding

Totals:
Rejections: 6
Offers: 2
Delays: 1
Waiting list: 1
Unknown: 3

Grad School Tally

2008-02-27T17:19:00.001-08:00

Ohio: Rejected
Washington: Rejected
Illinois: Rejected
Nebraska: Application delayed over transcripts
Baylor: Application delayed over transcripts
Riverside: Accepted with "Full" funding

Totals:
Rejections: 3
Offers: 1
Delays: 2
Unknown: 8

What I did to anger folks a MOVIEGUIDE

2008-02-23T11:07:00.000-08:00

Alright, first off, I have the next entry in my series on top issues all Christian artists should consider sitting in my notebook, ready to be typed up, edited, and posted to this blog. I fully intended for that to be the next thing I posted here, but then I posted this article and some people read it.

My last article at Christ and Pop Culture was on Movieguide's Faith and Value awards, otherwise known as "the Christian Oscars." Well, today, it appears that the people over at MOVIEGUIDE found my article and were not too happy (I have a feeling there's an internal memo floating around about me right now...). Several people from the organization have commented on the article. They have some interesting points to make, and I'm very happy to have them join in on the conversation! It looks to be a lively discussion if nothing else. Come see what all the hullabaloo is about yourself:
"Whatever is Pure: MOVIEGUIDE's Faith and Value Awards"

I promise, I will get the next real post up ASAP. Thanks for bearing with me as I get myself into trouble.

-alan

Wearing Our Faith: Christian Clothes and Bumper Stickers

2008-02-06T14:41:00.000-08:00

In my most recent post over at Christ and Pop Culture, I explore how bumper stickers and tee-shirts are used to promote Christianity. I engage questions like: What does it mean to wear a Christian tee-shirt? And what effect does it have on people? The article is entitled, Wearing Our Faith: the Purpose and Effectiveness of Bumper Stickers and Christian Clothes. Here's an excerpt:

One of the remarkable aspects of our culture is that although we are inundated with advertisements all day long, we are often willing to pay for a tee-shirt or bumper sticker which advertises for someone. As Calvin (of Calvin and Hobbes) once said, “A good shirt turns the wearer into a walking corporate billboard.” When we aren’t wearing an advertisement or sticking one to our bumper, we are often promoting an idea or belief which serves to identify us with a group: “I learned these 10 things from playing video games,” “war is wrong,” “gun control is unjust,” or even “Jesus saves!”

It is this last use of slogans, labels, and branding that I would like to explore. Specifically, I would like to ask what is the purpose and effect of using clothing and bumper stickers to promote the Christian worldview, and should we support this form of promotion? To answer this question we should look at how labels and slogans usually function and their effect.

Continue reading...

I think you'll enjoy reading the article and I hope you find that it encourages you to think critically about the way our faith should be displayed. As always, I look forward to your comments, critiques, and questions.

-alan

p.s. I hope to have a new, "real" post on here soon. It will be the next post on the series I'm doing on the essential issues facing Christian artists in different mediums. I apologize that all I've been posting are plugs for other blogs, but since I've basically moved all my social commentary posts from here to Christ and Pop Culture, I'm trying to keep this blog for issues that are specific to art and artists--which means I have a bit less to write about. Thanks for being patient.

Mass Effect, Jack Thompson, Kevin McCullough, Cooper Lawrence, Fox News, and the SeXbox 360

2008-01-28T20:20:00.000-08:00

With all the recent hub and bub about Mass Effect, I thought I would remind everyone of the article I wrote before this controversy erupted concerning the moral implications of the game.

It's called "Mommy, what is that alien doing?" and you can read it over at Christ and Pop Culture. Here's a section of the article:

On November 20th, one of the most anticipated games of the year will be released for the Xbox 360, Bioware’s Mass Effect; when it arrives on my doorstep, I will have the choice to encourage alien, unnatural, sexual immorality. PC gamers have known Bioware for their Baldur’s Gate and Neverwinter Nights series, but console gamers were first introduced to the game designer with the 2003 hit Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic. Capturing the spirit of the epic Star Wars story KOTOR (as the kids would soon call it) became one of the most popular games for the original Xbox and arguably the systems best RPG. Aside from the Star Wars branding, KOTOR succeeded because of its compelling storytelling. Much of the game could be spent getting to know your characters; the more they liked you and approved of your actions, the more they would share about their history. In addition to back story, talking to the other characters in the game opened up new plot threads. Ultimately, however, these conversations didn’t affect the plot of the game much, they just opened little side missions. In Bioware’s new role playing game set in space, how the player treats the other characters will determine if they are able to visit entire worlds and whether or not they will witness an alien, lesbian, love scene.

Steven Pinker and the Moral Instinct

2008-01-23T13:38:00.000-08:00

In an article written for the New York Times on January 13th, Steven Pinker makes his case for the biological and evolutionary source of our morality.

Pinker concludes that since certain moral ideals (murder, incest, etc...) are held universally and can be made to fit in the story of evolution, morals are all a product of evolution. At the articles conclusion, he argues that while morals are not absolute (since they are merely biological) we should strive to improve our morals--thus making the oddly elementary mistake of suggesting that we should adjust our (non-transcendent) "moral instinct" to the transcendent moral law exists outside of our biology while denying that transcendent moral laws exist.

What moral law is it that he appeals to?

Read it and see for yourself: Moral Instinct

The Science of Violence in Mice and Men

2008-01-22T15:40:00.000-08:00

An article I wrote on the way the media reports on scientific studies was just published over at Christ and Pop Culture. It's entitled, The Science of Violence in Mice and Men":

"A few days ago a news article ran on the front page of Yahoo which reported on a recent scientific study. The research claims to show that mice - and by extension humans - naturally take pleasure in violence. Researchers taught a mouse to press a button if he wanted another male mouse to be released into his cage. They found that the mouse would consistently call for the intruder and then fight him, suggesting that the violence is viewed as a reward. The conclusion that is drawn is that humans, whose brains are “analogous” to the brains of mice, are built to crave violence like they crave sex. A desire for violence is a natural, although no longer “beneficial” aspect of our physiological make-up.

There are a few observations I’d like to make about this news report and the study it was based on... "

Top Five Issues All Worship Musicians Should Consider

2008-01-03T10:08:00.001-08:00

This is the first entry in my series of important issues for Christian artists in different mediums. Before you read this, I would strongly encourage you to read the two posts that precede it, Ten Issues All Christian Artists Should Consider #1-5 and #6-10, as they form the foundation of the series and address issues which are concerns to all mediums.

The quality of praise and worship music in the Church is a contentious subject, affected by denomination, upbringing, geography, and taste. There are those who do not allow instruments in the church, others only sing hymns, and still others only sing songs written by top song writers like Chris Tomlin and Matt Redman. While some of the differences in styles and types of worship music reflect our different ways of glorifying God, this does not excuse us as song writers, worship leaders, musicians, and congregational singers from seeking aesthetic excellence. This list, as with all the lists in this series, is not comprehensive or in any particular order, but is meant to serve as a starting point for the worship artist.

1. Don't Support CCLI

Christian Copyright Licensing International is an organization that takes an annual royalty from all churches with members from 1-200,000+. Here's how CCLI explains their function:

When we sing songs in a worship service there is no “fee” or “charge” to perform works of a religious nature. But when we retype the lyric, whether it’s for an overhead projection, power point computer projection or photocopied lyrics in the bulletin, it is expected that we will compensate the owners of the lyrics for that usage. The licenses required and the royalties they produce involve Christian Copyright Licensing Incorporated (CCLI) www.ccli.com .

Yes, you read that correctly. If you project or copy the lyrics of songs written to glorify God, you have to pay someone. Of course, if the lyrics come from a hymn or another song in Public Domain, then you are free to use them without paying a fee*. Churches must report to the CCLI what songs they sing, and the CCLI then pays the artist a royalty based on their reports. One of the major problems with this is that artists are encouraged to write songs which will be song a lot, not songs which honor God. Take a look at the language the CCLI uses to explain this arrangement:

CCLI income is very sizeable for major Christian Music publishing companies, oftentimes larger than their Performance income. There are many songwriters unknown to the general public or Christian consumers at large who are among the most well-paid composers in the Christian music genre based on their CCLI income.

If the CCLI was an organization which outlined how pastors or Christian counselors could be "among the most well-paid" in their industry, the organization would be almost universally condemned as anathema to the teachings of Christ and Paul. So why does this organization get away with seducing song writers into writing worship songs for profit?

I am not arguing that praise and worship artists should never be paid for their service, but I am saying that the CCLI system is horrifying and dangerous to the spiritual life of the Church. I would like to encourage praise and worship artists, worship leaders, musicians, and congregations to write new songs which aren't governed by CCLI and to sing songs which are in public domain.

For more information about the CLLI, read this compelling blog entry by Warren Smith entitled, God, Mammon, and the Worship Wars.

2. Remember what your job is

The task of leading worship or writing worship music is not to be taken lightly. You are aiding people in the act of worshiping the holy, mighty, loving God. The words you write and the songs you chose will shape the worship that the congregation will offer. With such a momentous duty, it is important for us to search the Scriptures for passages will describe what it means to worship in song. For example, while the Psalms are often quoted when people are sorting out what worship is, verses like Ephesians 5:19 are rarely dealt with: "speaking to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making music to the Lord in your heart." It is imperative that we are not selective when we look at what the Word of God has to say about worship.

In addition, remembering what our job is requires that we are concerned with aiding others in worshiping God in Spirit and in Truth. As worship leaders there will be times when we would like to arrange a song in a particular way because we enjoy the way it sounds, but such an arrangement might not be conducive to worship. As song writers there will be times when we wish to write a song in a favorite genre--country, hard core, rap, ska...--but if the music does not lead others into a place where they can sincerely worship the Lord without distractions, then we shouldn't write the song. The wrong way to approach writing a worship song is to first decide on a genre or style and then write the lyrics.

One test we can use to identify our motivation for choosing particular songs or writing in particular styles is to take notice of how we envision performing the songs. When we imagine ourselves leading the church in worship, what to we see the congregation doing? If they are in shock of the song, in awe of our presence, impressed by our abilities, enamored by our hip-ness, or in any other way drawn to the music or musicians, then your motivation to worship or write is likely misplaced.

3. Worshiping God in Truth means being in reverent awe of Him

I believe as a consequence of worship artists who are paid to write songs which will be popular, not songs which are theologically and aesthetically excellent, most modern praise and worship songs deny or ignore the fact that we are commanded to fear the Lord.

Joyful songs of praise are important to our worship, however, they cannot be shallow, giddy, saccharine pop tunes which lack any spirit of reverence. There is a way to be joyful and still recognize God as almighty and awesome.

Where this issue of reverence has had the most negative affect is in songs which speak of Christ's work on the cross, the depth of our sin, or other serious issues. While we should be filled with joy for what Christ did on the cross, this joy must include an acknowledgement of the price Christ paid. To fail to do so is to dishonor Christ's work and means that we are not worshiping in Truth. When we sing of Christ's hands being nailed to the cross for our sins, how can we use melodies and a style which sounds as if it was taken from a top-40 teenage love song?

Some popular worship songs sound like they were love songs written to a girl. In such songs we sing of love, beauty, passion, the desire for an intimate relationship, and the desire to see the person's face or to touch them, among other things. In some of these songs our love for God is disturbingly similar to a teenage infatuation. Where such songs go astray is that they present our love of God without acknowledging the righteous fear that we are called to have for Him. Instead of the kind of love we have for a father who is our judge and provider, someone who is not our peer, such songs reflect the kind of love a teenager has for a peer of the opposite sex. The lack of fear and reverence leads to shallow, theologically unsound music.

As artists and leaders of worship music we need to seek to understand what the Word says about how are are to fear the LORD. A good place to start is to notice the tone and language Paul uses when he talks about Christ and what He did for us.

4. Your model does not come from the radio or television

For the last 20+ years worship music has started to look more and more like a sub-genre of adult contemporary music. The way worship artists are marketed (we can thank the CLLI for teaching them that the job is profitable), the way worship leaders and musicians carry themselves and act on stage, and the style and content of modern praise and worship music all reflect an unhealthy lineage from secular, commercial, pop music.

The objectives of someone leading a congregation in worship and a musical artist who is striving to succeed in the pop music market are completely opposed.

A pop artist entertains his audience.

A worship leader assists others in worshiping God.

A pop artist writes songs that he believes will be pleasing to the largest audience possible. This usually means simple, trite, inoffensive lyrics--lyrics which appeal to people's best impressions of themselves.

A worship artist writes songs which glorify God and aid others in worshiping Him. This means the lyrics are both symbolically rich and theologically profound; they identify the worst aspects of our character (our sin nature) and glorify the best in His.

A pop artist desires to make him/herself an icon, and idol, and image. Image sells.

A worship leader/artist desires to vanish. Not to be filmed or photographed or lifted up as an icon of worship, but to shift every single bit of honor to God. No matter how much a worship artist says with their lips that they want all the glory to be given to God, if they are signing autographs and taking pictures with adoring fans they are giving lip service.

The bottom line is that worship music should not be entered into as an occupation, at least not in the same way that musicians and writers launch careers in the music industry as a whole. Worship bands are not just bands with songs that praise God. The very idea of writing songs and leading others to praise God is that our focus is not on ourselves and our glory, and it is not on pleasing or entertaining the audience. For any musician in the music industry, creating an image for ourselves and pleasing and entertaining the audience are foundational to any success.

Before we write or sing we must remember that what we are doing with music is fundamentally and profoundly opposed to what is done in the secular, commercial, music industry.

5. Strive to write lyrics and use language excellently

I have avoided making broad statements about the state of modern worship music, but here I must be blunt:

(Most) Modern Praise and Worship music lyrics are embarrassingly bad.

They are theologically unsound, poetically childish, and often they are linguistic nonsense--a pile of religious-sounding words thrown together without any order or purpose other than to evoke the feeling of the sacred which is a left over from the time when song writers used those same words in their proper context.

If you are going to write a worship song, a song to glorify our wonderful God, make it a work of excellence. Have something to sing about and express it in a varied and complex way. When a song has simplistic and repetitive music the listener and singer will drift into a dream-like state where they lose all understanding of the meaning of the words they are singing--all they know to do is sing. But we want the congregation to worship not only with their lips, but with their hearts and minds--in Spirit and in Truth.

Ask yourself when you write or choose a song for worship, will these words encourage the congregation to meditate and consider the meaning behind them, or are they just a collection of religious sounding words?

Read good poetry and prose and hymns. Consider men like William Cowper who wrote There Is a Fountain Filled with Blood. Cowper was a famous poet who published works of his own and translated Homer. This was a person who studied language and the way words relate and interact with each other. I'm not asking all worship artists to be published poets, but I would ask them to be students of language. The desire to glorify God through lyrics is good, but it is better to have such a desire and seek to fulfill it through artful work.

For a detailed discussion of how certain religious words (holy, wonderful, mighty, praise, glory, honor, etc...) have begun to lose their meaning in modern worship due to their senseless repetition, read my blog post entitled, Worship Music and Dead Language.

As always, I would love to hear all your responses to this, and if there are any points that should be added to this list, please let me know.

-alan

*Of course, if a modern artist takes a Public Domain song and adds a chorus, they own the rights to the "new" song. Both Chris Tomlin and Todd Agnew have taken Amazing Grace and added their own chorus, giving them rights to the song. Every time my church sings Amazing Grace with the five "new" lines from Chris Tomlin, he gets paid.

Why Vote When You Can Laugh? The Daily Show and Complacency

2007-12-20T16:48:00.000-08:00

Over at Christ and Pop Culture I've written a piece entitled, Why Vote When You Can Laugh? The Daily Show and Complacency concerning how satire has become our primary form of political discourse. Specifically I look at how watching programs like the Daily Show can allow us to feel as if we are politically active when really we're just watching and laughing:

That time is again upon us when car, make-up, and insurance commercials are momentarily sidelined to make way for content-less, image-shaping, political advertisements; when millions of bumpers across this great land will be drafted in an attempt to create the illusion that a candidate has wide-spread support (isn’t the logic of a bumper sticker, “I think this guy’s so worthy of my vote that I’ll attach his name to the back of my car. If I’m willing to go that far, you should vote for him too!”?); when presidential candidates meet on national television to debate issues which will affect the lives of millions of people, but are only allowed a few minutes to state their arguments and are given even time less for rebuttals.

Ten Issues All Christian Artists Should Consider: #6-10

2007-12-18T17:39:00.001-08:00

Over the next few weeks I will be writing a series of posts which present the essential issues each Christian artist should consider in their medium. I hope to do a post on Painting (and drawing and graphic design), Photography, Film, Poetry, Writing, and Music.

In this post I'm going to continue to lay out the basic ideas that all Christian artists should consider. In later posts I will expand to talk about specific mediums.

6. Study and perfect your craft.

This point seems simple enough, but it is often overlooked. Remember that having a good purpose and a good idea doesn't mean you will make something excellent. Creating unto the Lord means putting in the time necessary to become skilled at whatever medium it is you are working in. Practice, study, learn.

7. Remember that the craft is a tool for expression, not the thing itself.

Whenever a talented and skilled artist of any kind loses themselves in their craft, it depresses and frustrates me. You can be the most skilled painter in the world, but if you have nothing to say, then why paint? You can have the loveliest voice heard by man, but if the words you sing have no purpose, then why sing?

I have witnessed many musicians, singers, and visual artists become consumed with their skill and displaying it, as if the skill was a thing itself.

When I was a teen, I got a Ham Radio license. My grandfather, father, and a good friend of mine were all into the hobby, so I took it up. After I studied extensively to get my license, and after I spend a considerable amount of money for a radio, I found to my dismay that the only thing talked about on Ham Radio is Ham Radio. The act of communicating was the content of the communication. Needles to say, the hobby didn't last.

As artists we can become like Ham radio operators, expressing only the fact that we can express well.

Typically, I believe this happens to artists when they become too involved in a community (much like the problem with Ham radio) or when they go to school for their skill. If you are in an artist community be very cautious that your conversations don't exclusively surround skill and craftsmanship. Try to involve artists who use other mediums into your community. Talk about other mediums. Read books together. Watch films together. Go to galleries together. Study the Word together. Go watch people in the mall and consider what they do. Just remember that your skill, no matter how great, is not the thing itself.

8. Find or start and community for support--online doesn't count.

As artists we need counsel, advice, correction, guidance, encouragement, conviction, companionship and love; we need community. Find one, or start one if necessary, and edify each other in the faith as you strive to make excellent works to God's glory. Hold each other accountable for what you do and what you make. Help each other financially, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. This kind of help cannot be duplicated on the Internet. You need to have genuine human interaction.

9. Consider, always consider what the medium, genre, and form says.

Whatever vehicle you use to communicate contains in itself a message. Before you paint, sing, write, play, dance, or film, consider how the various forms you employ will shape the content you present.

A simple example: how will a viewer be affected by a cartoon Jesus versus a realistic looking Jesus? What does a cartoon as a genre communicate?

Failure to simply consider how form shapes content has resulted in innumerable, poorly made "Christian" pop albums, TV shows, and bumper stickers.

For a lengthy discussion of this issue, read one of my first blog posts titled The Struggle of Christian Art Part 1.

10. Pray for humility.

Should God bless you with the talent and opportunities to create excellent works for Him, be constantly on guard against pride--it has brought low many gifted men and women.

It is my hope, and prayer, that artists who are believers would use these ideas to create greater works for God's glory. These lists are not intended to be comprehensive, and as such I would love to hear how you would expand them.

Ten Issues All Christian Artists Should Consider: #1-5

2007-12-14T13:19:00.001-08:00

In this post I'm going to lay out the basic ideas that all Christian artists should consider. In later posts I will expand to talk about specific mediums.

The Top Ten Ideas All Christian Artists Should Consider:

1. Remember that everything you do should be to God's glory.

This means that whatever create or do should be an act of worship to Him. The very act of creating is a work, a service that reflects our manishness (our made-in-the-image-of-God-ness) and mirrors God's own love of aesthetic creation.

2. Have a purpose in mind.

I use the word "purpose" as opposed to "message" because not all art has a distinct and readily communicable message to be discovered. A wonderfully made vase might not contain the Gospel message, but its existence, its purpose can give evidence to a beauty, a loveliness that is found in the Christian worldview. What is imperative is that the artists consider what they are doing.
Purpose can mean a lot of things. It could be the purpose of the work to explore beauty, or merely cause the viewer/reader/audience to explore an idea themselves. Be careful not to confuse "purpose" with "message"; sometimes a work of art has a very clear, specific thing to communicate, but often the purpose is to revel in the complexity of life itself.

Ask yourself, "Why should I create this thing?", "Why is it better that I make this, or do this than not?", "What is said or done or communicated or meant or alluded to by this work?", "Am I contributing to a conversation, or merely restating what some other work has already expressed?". Often, the worst works of art by believers are those which are simply not considered. Expression is good. Creation is good. But the goodness of these do not give us license for unexamined artistry.

3. Know that whether you mean to or not, you are expressing a worldview.

Art reveals worldviews. It just does. Whatever a person fundamentally believes about the most essential issues in life--eternity, truth, goodness, beauty, evil, humanity, redemption, love, death, life, etc--will be exposed in their creation.

If at your core you believe that humans are corrupt and selfish beasts, then when you paint your figures will be bestial. Or if you write, your characters will be narcissistic hypocrites.

The frightening fact about art is that it does not reveal the worldview we claim to hold (except in truly bad art), but what we actually believe.

As a Christian artist you might claim to believe that God came to save the sins of the world, but perhaps in your true worldview, you (much like Jonah) believe that God would not bother to save some people--child molesters lets say. If this is your true belief, it will come out in your works of art. So what does this mean for us as artists? Three tasks lay before us:

First we must know the Word of God. We must be grounded in what God has revealed about humanity, the universe, and Himself. If we fail to do this then we risk presenting a work of art which could be identified as Christian but which distorts the Truth. (See Thomas Kincade's worlds without need of redemption for examples of this).

Second, we must know the universe. The Word of God only makes sense in relation to the universe He created. We cannot make excellent works of art about our universe if we know nothing about it and the people that inhabit it. All great artists must become students of the universe and humans. Failure to do this usually results in works of art that feature unrealistic characters or situations. They tend to be didactic morality tales in which sinners are immediately punished for their sins and believers are immediately blessed for their righteousness. The universe is complex, thanks to God, so understand and reflect the complexity.

Third, we must know ourselves. We cannot create excellent works of art which accurately express the Christian worldview unless we know ourselves in the world. We cannot know that all men are fallen unless we know that we are fallen. Likewise, we cannot know that all love comes from Christ unless we know how we love and are loved. Failure to do this means works which lack mercy and intimacy.

4. It is not the job of your work of art to spread the Gospel.

Consider the Temple artwork commissioned by God. Palm Trees and Flower Blossoms do not express the need all men have before God for repentance and sacrifice, and yet that's what you would have found in the walls of the Temple that Solomon built.

For some reason, the Christian culture has decided that all art must be held to higher evangelistic standard than the objects created by any other occupation. A car mechanic is not pressured by his church to etch John 3:16 on every muffler he fixes. A computer technician is not pressured to turn every computer virus into an object lesson about sin related to an unsuspecting costumer. And yet our painters are often looked down upon if they don't work a verse or a distinctly Biblical message into a painting. And our musicians are discouraged if they sing about anything other than Jesus.

As an artist working for the glory of God, your task is much broader than didactically retelling the Gospel.

5. It is the job of your life to glorify God, which means spreading the Gospel.

Just as problematic as it is when Christians use arts as bait to sucker people into hearing the Gospel, is when they believe that their task as artists is wholly separate from the Great Commission.

Art tends to work slowly, good art at least. It takes time for the viewer/audience to digest the ideas, to consider their weight in the real world, and to judge their veracity. As a result of this, some Christian artists have taken the view that their job is merely to express stuff about life and then sit back and see what happens. They become more concerned about how they will be perceived as "artists" than with the very pressing issue of sharing the Gospel. Often, these same artists feel extremely comfortable in openly and aggressively addressing social issues, but not spiritual ones. We must never, ever lose an urgency to share the Truth in love.

It is not the goal of art to share the Gospel, it is the goal of our lives to glorify God, and one act in that glorification is the command to spread the Gospel. How do you actively seek to tell people the Good News in all areas of your life? Do the same thing in your art.

With some people and in some situations I share the Gospel by loving them, really loving them as people made in the image of God; not so that I can secretly get them on my good side or to learn some dirt about them that I can later use to "convert them," but because I genuinely love them. With other people I try to address theological or philosophical questions they might have. With others I try to allow my marriage and life be a testament to God's loving kindnesses. With others I discuss the fallenness of this world. With others I discuss the beauty and love to be found in this world. With still others I speak very plainly and openly about Christ's work on the cross in space, time, and history.

Our art should reflect the same variety of approaches and views to the Gospel as we find ourselves using in all aspects of our lives.

It is my hope, and prayer, that artists who are believers would use these ideas to create greater works for God's glory. These lists are not intended to be comprehensive, and as such I would love to hear how you would expand them.

Next week (or in a few days) I will post the second half of the list.

My Review of No Country for Old Men

2007-12-13T09:31:00.000-08:00

My review of the Coen brother's No Country for Old Men just got posted at Christ and Pop Culture. Take a read:
"The Coen brother's latest film, No Country for Old Men, has been released to almost unanimous praise by film critics, making it a strong contender for film of the year. The film is an adaptation of a novel by Cormac McCarthy, an author known for his unremitting violence, esoteric dialogue, and dense descriptions--preoccupations shared by the Coen brothers in many of their previous films."
Continue reading...

Your Life in 12 Words or Less: the Dehumanizing Effect of Facebook Profiles, Personal Ads, and Eulogies

2007-11-22T11:52:00.000-08:00

My latest post to the e-zine Christ and Pop Culture is about the way we summarize our lives. It's called, Your Life in 12 Words or Less: the Dehumanizing Effect of Facebook Profiles, Personal Ads, and Eulogies:

I like to talk. In general, I feel that I usually know what the right thing is to say to a person when they need advice or admonishment. But there's one situation where I don't know if I'll ever have the right words: when a person has lost a loved one. What is there to say that could ever come close to what they are going through? The sorrow, the questions, the guilt, the shock, what words exist that could be shaped to be commensurate to their experience? As difficult as these situations are, imagine if it was your job to summarize the entire life of a person within one or two sentences, not to offer eulogies or condolences, but to give readers or viewers a succinct statement that expressed what the person did with their life. Whenever I read of a murder, a suicide, or an accident, I try to note how the reporter sums up the life of a once living human in 12 words or less.

“Mommy, what is that alien doing?”

2007-11-17T20:14:00.000-08:00

If you're into gaming, check out the new blog I wrote called “Mommy, what is that alien doing?", it's the first post I've written for the new blog I'm writing for called Christ in Pop Culture. In it I discuss morality and video games:

"On November 20th, one of the most anticipated games of the year will be released for the Xbox 360, Bioware's Mass Effect; when it arrives on my doorstep, I will have the choice to encourage alien, unnatural, sexual immorality."

Christ and Pop Culture

2007-11-13T12:09:00.001-08:00

If you a Believer who is at all interested in Pop Culture--E.G. Film, Television, Music, Technology, whatever, then you should check out the new blog I'm writing for called Christ And Pop Culture It's a cool blog project with several writers who are all well theologically grounded and who have a love for Christianity and the Arts. Please come check it out.

I'm still going to keep writing for this blog; I will keep the more heavy theoretical and theological stuff here. This looks to be a very neat project, so I hope you'll all give it a view.

The Reasonableness of the Greek Religion?

2007-11-04T20:54:00.001-08:00

Today, the L.A. Times has an article on the benefit of Greek polytheism over monotheism (read Christianity) written by Mary Lefkowitz is professor emerita at Wellesley College. Lefkowitz argument essential breaks down to this:

Monotheism	Polytheism
Rejects other culture's gods	Embraces multiculturalism
Asserts a masculine God	Allows for gods of both sexes
Claims to have the answers	Does not claim to have the answers
Has an authoritarian God	The gods work as a sort of democracy
An omnibenevolent God	Gods who actually cause chaos and evil (thus providing "a more plausible account than monotheism of the presence of evil and confusion in the world")
God is to be reverenced, not complained to	Since the gods are many and fairly cruel themselves, humans can rightly complain to them
Things will turn out well in the end	No one knows if things will be okay in the end, since the gods are crazy

Since we "know" that multiculturalism, gender equality (in our gods?), democracy, chaos, and skepticism about the future are all ideas embraced by an educated intellectual in the year 2007, the Greek religion must be true.*

There are too many absurd holes in this article to point them all out, I would encourage you to discover them yourself, but here are three parting thoughts.

First, Lefkowitz asserts a religion of pragmatism: whatever fits best with what we want is true. As an epistemology, pragmatism offers no foundation other than the utilitarian whims of its followers. Using the same logic, we could claim that we should believe that no Indians died when we came to America because we're a great country. Blah, utter nonsense.

Second, although Lefkowitz is said to be publishing a book on Greek gods, I wonder if she's actually studied them. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of the Greek gods can tell you that they were the most cruel and capricious gods in nearly all religions, using humans and their lives as pawns in their own childish squabbles. Take for example, Leda and the Swan, where Zeus takes the form of a swan and rapes Leda. Or the myth of Io who is seduced by Zeus, turned into a cow, and forced by a jealous wife to wander the earth without rest because she slept with Zeus. I could be wrong, but bestial rape and torturing a woman for being seduced by a nearly all-powerful god hardly qualifies as progressive thinking.

Third, to some extent, Lefkowitz has received her wish, the Greek gods do seem to be highly esteemed by our culture. Heavenly beauties whose decisions and actions shape the very fabric of our culture, whose infidelities and failures comprise the primary source of all our stories, and in whom each individual can see a reflection of their own personal struggles and hopes--if these are Lefkowitz's Greek gods, they walk among us still.

*Before someone calls me out as a fool, yes, I get that the article isn't really suggesting that people believe that Zeus is real. Lefkowitz is tapping into Dawkin's argument that being a Christian is no more rational than believing in Zeus. But unless we call out this equivocation people will continue to go on using it, poor logic and all.

Hubris

2007-11-03T17:24:00.001-07:00

It is the great hubristic claim of our time that science has finally freed itself from the fallibility that marked its younger self.

They were mistaken before; subject to superstitions, misinformation, and ignorance. Fools crafting models in the dark, guided more by their place and time than by what was. What few facts they could discover were stifled or repressed by the scientist’s isolation or the ignorance of his community.

But that was then.

Source for Sermons?

2007-10-31T16:24:00.000-07:00

Doing a random vanity search on Google for my blog--to see if anyone was reading this darn thing--I came across two sermons which footnoted this very blog, A PDF from Saint Stephen's and one from Kingwood Bible.

Whenever I think I'm speaking into a vacuum, it seems like God always finds delightful and meaningful ways of encouraging me to keep writing. To HIM be the glory.

But, if you do use me as a source in a sermon, please let me know. It would mean a lot.

The Desire for Narrative

2007-10-13T12:31:00.001-07:00

Yes, this is a repost. I apologize to anyone who signed up to my RSS feed or Feedburner and got this article sent to them again. The reason I'm reposting this is that it got buried under a school assignment and I don't think many people got a chance to read it. It's a long read, but I think it's one of the most important posts I've ever written. So if you have the time, please read it and leave some comments.

Lately I have had a lot of ideas knocking about in my head about the prevalence of existentialist ideas in modern thought. I haven't quite gotten around to blogging about these ideas, but after reading a particularly distressing Wired article I thought I should write a bit.

In Thomas De Zengotita's brilliant book Mediated, he discusses how modern life is characterized by a mediation; instead of experiencing and learning about the world directly, we increasingly tend to interact with it through an intermediate source. A obvious example can be found in almost any natural disaster. Very soon after the disaster occurs, it slips from becoming a tragedy to an event. The coverage becomes the focus of our thoughts and discussions. The debate about the disaster becomes the event itself. One critic described the premise of the book like this:

"Influenced by the media-inspired "culture of performance," we now live our lives as if we are performers practicing method acting, he maintains. We go through the motions of expected reactions to everything from the 9/11 terrorist attacks to Princess Diana's death to documentaries of the Kennedy assassination and the civil rights movement. The Internet, satellite television, and a host of technological products and services now give us the impression of participating in current and historical events to such an extent that we can barely distinguish the varying levels of what de Zengotita categorizes as ranging from the real-real to the unreal-real."

De Zengotita does not extensively explore why we desire to be performers in the world; I would posit that it has much to do with an over-saturation of narratives.

Stories have always been a central aspect of human relationships and cultures; we always have and always will tell stories. Stories are part of the way we learn about the world and our place in. But never has there been a time where there have been so many stories told, so often, so ubiquitously. At any time of day, an average person in most countries can turn on the TV and be presented with hundreds of stories covering thousands of conflicts. Movie theaters and home rentals make it almost as easy to watch stories on the big screen. Newspapers, magazines, and books all are filled with narratives.

Setting aside the monstrous narrative beasts that are TV, film, and books, our cultural stories are so interwoven into our lives that pieces of them can be found on billboards and on Internet ads. The on-going "real life" narratives of celebrities are perfect examples of this. We might start "reading" their story on the Internet, and find pieces of it on the evening news, over coffee with a friend, from a billboard which features the latest film staring the celebrity, and so on. Our lives are utterly and completely filled with narratives. And not simply "stories," but narratives of the kind De Zengotita has in mind.

When people share personal stories, they rarely take on the larger-than-life, ontological aspect that written, filmed, or otherwise "created" narratives do. In such creative narratives the protagonist is always at the center of the universe, and there is nothing mundane or banal about their existence or actions (if you've been wondering, this is the bit about the influence of existentialism on our modern lives). Everything they do is imbued with meaning because they are enacting a story. Actions which might appear to be dull (going to work, mowing the lawn, brushing teeth, etc...) in this narrative are actually just as meaningful as major plot twists. And important actions and events in the narrative take on transcendent meaning and purpose--winning against all odds, getting the girl, setting things right are all accomplishments which are greater than the sum of their earthly parts.

Do you know that feeling you get when you walk out of a movie theater after seeing a film that draws you into its world? That feeling of foreignness that lingers for a few moments, challenged by the sun light and trivial world of reality? That is the fading residue of the illusion of transcendence that compelling narratives give us; they are able to persuade us that the events of the story are of such cosmic significance that the external world of modernity appears as a cheep substitute.

In a post-Christian world, the importance of the individual must be established and upheld by some means, and narratives are the most efficient means to do this. We are all important. Why? Because we are all performers in the story of our lives.

Only there is a problem.

Life, by in large, is dreadfully dull.

In the real world, the act of brushing our teeth is not imbued with cosmic purpose, although it might win us friends. Mowing the lawn is a chore. And most of us are not faced with the kind of singularly important conflict that is the defining feature of most stories. Our conflicts tend to be mundane, and once resolved, they lose their significance rapidly.

But humans are remarkably adaptive creatures, and taking cue from the millions of narratives which we bath in daily, we tend to make narratives when none present themselves--often to the detriment of ourselves, the world, and truth. If you've ever talked to anyone between the ages of 12 and 20, you'll know what I mean. Teenagers are wonderfully adept at creating drama in order to give their otherwise petty daily actions profound meaning.

"It's like, I LIKE him, but he doesn't even know how I feel because that OTHER girl, Stephany or whatEVER her nam is is like always with him and I told her to leave him alone or else I would tell her brother about her little pills but she just pretended not to her me so I'm going to text him and that'll..."

I don't use this as an example of how foolish teenagers are, because no age group is immune to the thirst for narrative; all groups act out in one way or another--teenagers are just easiest to pick on.

In the past, this desire for narrative always had one very big limitation: no matter how hard you wanted to be someone else, some character of your own creation, you would always be you, stuck in the "real" world. Aside from a few exceptionally strange people who are pathological liars, actors, or spies, it just was not feasible to actually create our own character. You could take actions which would fill your life with drama, but you would still be stuck with you. That is, until the Internet.

Thomas Montgomery, a 45-year-old father of two daughters, married to his wife Cindy for 16 years, recently plead guilty to shooting his rival in an Internet love-triangle. Wired magazine published this article accounting the entire story. Be warned. It is graphic and depressing. One day he simply decided to be someone else, so he made up a new identity and went online. He managed to trick a "17 year-old" girl into believing that he was an 18 year-old Marine. Even after this identity was reveled to be a hoax, he continued to be a "performer" in his own self-made narrative. The result of his seemingly childish (he was playing make-believe wasn't he?) actions were horrifyingly disastrous. Jealous of a 22 year-old co-worker who began carrying on a (digital) relationship with this 17 year-old-girl, Montgomery shot him in the parking lot where they worked.

I don't bring this up as a scare tactic, or to suggest that all people who try to narrativize their lives will end up murdering someone, but what should be clear is that there is something innately wrong about living the life of a character. The Internet affords us the ability to do what was once insane or impractical: we can all be characters, actors, stars. Not real people with real interests and concerns, but characters who closely resemble us. Our websites contain the trivial facts about us that interviewers drag out of affected celebrities, as if the most important aspects of our lives were what kind of foods we like, who we'd like to meet, and what our favorite movies are.

Consider Myspace for a moment.

There. Now you've got it.

See how pervasive this is? And who is immune?

But what is the source of this? Two truths. First, all people innately recognize that they are important and that certain events in life have transcendent purpose and significance. Second, all people desire to live lives that account for this innate importance and transcendent events, even if it requires absurd and obscene actions--life is meaningful, and if there is no rational reason to believe so, then all that is left are our narratives which feign meaning.

Christian Music and Album Covers

2007-09-25T15:53:00.001-07:00

I feel very disappointed that this has to be said, but Christian musical arts should not be selling their physical image on album covers, posters, or their myspace page. Being attractive, cool, or sexy is not a valid reason for other Christians to listen to your music, and it is so painfully antithetical to the Gospel that I am both angry and sad every time I come across it.

As consumers we should think twice before purchasing a Christian album which promotes the artist as an idol--a side note here, just because the artist is holding a cross, kneeling, or praying while they are posing seductively does not mean they are not trying to appear to be an idol. I understand that the commercial aspect of CCM encourages the artists to try to compete with secular artists who openly use sex or hipness-appeal to attract consumers, but how can you justify such a blatant attempt at becoming an idol Biblically?

If you are a Christian music artist, please consider the effect and purpose of your "image" is; remember that we should seek to give God glory, not ourselves. If you are a consumer of Christian music, please consider whether or not the artist is being marketed as an image (read idol).

By the way, if you think this is an isolated issue, please do a search for Christian music on myspace, particularly Holy Hip-Hop, but any genre will do.

The Desire for Narrative

2007-09-08T15:57:00.000-07:00

Lately I have had a lot of ideas knocking about in my head about the prevalence of existentialist ideas in modern thought. I haven't quite gotten around to blogging about these ideas, but after reading a particularly distressing Wired article I thought I should write a bit.

In Thomas De Zengotita's brilliant book Mediated, he discusses how modern life is characterized by a mediation; instead of experiencing and learning about the world directly, we increasingly tend to interact with it through an intermediate source. A obvious example can be found in almost any natural disaster. Very soon after the disaster occurs, it slips from becoming a tragedy to an event. The coverage becomes the focus of our thoughts and discussions. The debate about the disaster becomes the event itself. One critic described the premise of the book like this:

"Influenced by the media-inspired "culture of performance," we now live our lives as if we are performers practicing method acting, he maintains. We go through the motions of expected reactions to everything from the 9/11 terrorist attacks to Princess Diana's death to documentaries of the Kennedy assassination and the civil rights movement. The Internet, satellite television, and a host of technological products and services now give us the impression of participating in current and historical events to such an extent that we can barely distinguish the varying levels of what de Zengotita categorizes as ranging from the real-real to the unreal-real."

"It's like, I LIKE him, but he doesn't even know how I feel because that OTHER girl, Stephany or whatEVER her nam is is like always with him and I told her to leave him alone or else I would tell her brother about her little pills but she just pretended not to her me so I'm going to text him and that'll..."

There is No Peace? Part 2

2007-09-06T17:35:00.001-07:00

The Hebrew word in both Jeremiah 6:14 and Ezekiel 13:10-12 for "peace" is Shalom.

In another example of how the English language is overrated, our single word for peace painfully fails to capture the meaning of the Hebrew word Shalom, which has more to do with completeness, rightness, and soundness than freedom from violence. With this definition in mind, I believe these two verse speak volumes on how we as believers should interact with culture and make art.

Ezekiel 13:10-12:
"'Because they lead my people astray, saying, "Peace," when there is no peace, and because, when a flimsy wall is built, they cover it with whitewash, 11 therefore tell those who cover it with whitewash that it is going to fall. Rain will come in torrents, and I will send hailstones hurtling down, and violent winds will burst forth. 12 When the wall collapses, will people not ask you, "Where is the whitewash you covered it with?"

Jeremiah 6:14 "They have healed the brokenness of My people superficially,
Saying, 'Peace, peace,'
But there is no peace."

In both of these verses, God is speaking through His prophets, condemning the false prophets who are convincing everyone that everything is alright. Often times when we as believers think about how we should filter what comes into our minds, we think in terms of major sins: if a book as a sex scene in it, I can't read it; if a film has profanity, I can't watch it; if a TV show is filled with violence, I can't view it. But what should be of much greater concern is how the world presents to us Peace, but there is no peace.

A car commercial subtly persuades us that the purchase of a vehicle will make our lives complete. Difficulties, problems, all will be set right if we own a car.

A romantic comedy, free from sex scenes and frank dialogue about sex, suggests that if a person finds that special someone, the one person they are meant for in the world, they will be complete. All fears will melt away once we have true love. Nothing will be too frightening once we have that one, perfect, companion.

A political candidate assures his audience that if elected, he will make our country secure, safe, and sound. The poor will be fed, the corrupt will be outed, and the economy will be mended. If only he is elected, then we can have economic, geopolitical, and domestic peace.

But there is no peace.

When we as believers engage culture, we need to remember that our peace comes from Christ, from His work on the cross, from knowing where we belong and who we are, not from anything in this life. It is a fundamental truth that all people long for peace, for Shalom, and that one of the best ways to turn a buck is to promise people peace. Whether it is advertisements, films, or songs, we must remember that these things are merely white washed walls, covering up the ugly, unbearable fact that there is no peace in this life outside of Christ. Everything else is a chasing after wind.

As artists, this idea of medium as prophetic utterance is just as meaningful as for the consumer of art. When we create, we must create in such a way as to show that there is no peace outside of Christ. Whenever we fail to do this, we are false prophets.

So often Christian art slips into portraying humanity, the world, and nature as healed and at peace with God, because if humanity is not at peace with God, then people are stilling sinning, and if people are sinning then there is still sin in the world, and if there is sin in the world of our art, then it must have representation. When we fail to show that the world, humans, even nature to some extent, does not have peace, we are false prophets, white washing the world, when only the blood of Christ can do that.

In a similar way, when Christian artists are so focused on creating for their own subculture that they forget to speak to the issues that face all people, they are giving their audience peace, not in Christ, but in Christendom. When we only sing songs of rejoicing, of bliss, of blithe, we are asserting that the peace of Christ has already taken us out of suffering; we are false prophets crying, "Peace, peace, But there is no peace."

There is No Peace?

2007-09-06T09:39:00.000-07:00

This morning I read a passage in Ezekiel that struck me as addressing some of the most central problems with our culture and arts (both Christian and secular):

Ezekiel 13:10-12:
"'Because they lead my people astray, saying, "Peace," when there is no peace, and because, when a flimsy wall is built, they cover it with whitewash, 11 therefore tell those who cover it with whitewash that it is going to fall. Rain will come in torrents, and I will send hailstones hurtling down, and violent winds will burst forth. 12 When the wall collapses, will people not ask you, "Where is the whitewash you covered it with?"

Here's a passage with a very similar meaning in Jeremiah:

Jeremiah 6:14 "They have healed the brokenness of My people superficially,
Saying, 'Peace, peace,'
But there is no peace."

Before I explain how I believe these verses are extremely important to our understanding of culture and art, I would love to hear some other views. I'm going to wait a few hours, or days and see what some of you can come up with. How could these verses help us understand our roles as creators and consumers of art?

Others?

2007-08-28T09:21:00.000-07:00

The more I explore the world of Christianity and the Arts, the more I find that I am in disagreement with other believers in the Arts, and about fundamentally important issues. Those who are the most vocal about Christian aesthetics, tend to have a theology which abuses the Arts for an unbiblical motive.

I'm not a Christian reconstructionalist, Dominionist, Liberal, or Emergent.

These differences are important because they all have a tremendous effect on the actual creation and use of art.

For many who are concerned with Christian aesthetics, Art is a vehicle for social and political change. In this crowd, the Great Commission is secondary to the physical needs of people, and Art is the method by which we can draw the Church's attention to those physical needs. Many who follow this view will scream to catch the ears of those ignoring social injustice, but shun the thought of speaking of Christ's work on the cross publicly.

For others, Art is a means of conquering the culture in order to help establish a Christian kingdom. If we retreat from the Arts, the secular world will have total control over it! Christ's kingdom is no longer spiritual in this ideology, it can be measured in album sales and popularity.

Then there are those who would have us make Christian Art so that we can retreat from the world. If we have our own songs, we will not have to be exposed to theirs. Art in this view is a aspartame solution, a poor and cancerous substitute which at best will make us gaseous and at worst will kill us. And the Art of the unsaved is seen as unredeemable waste, utterly devoid of the glory of God and incapable of communicating anything worthy of praise.

Or perhaps Art is used to communicate spiritual truth, since propositional truth is completely elusive. Here Art replaces the exposition of Scripture and is imbued with mystical meaning to fill some imagined spiritual void which the Word of God cannot speak to.

Or Art is a tool for reaching the lost. A disingenuous and insincere platform for evangelism that is too close to propaganda for my comfort. Much like setting traps for the lost, they make art that closely resembles that of the world to lure unbelievers into their midst and convince them that they need not sacrifice any of the amusements of the world. And by repetition of Christian-esse over the familiar sounds of the world, they can subtly persuade unsuspecting heathens to convert. How similar to radio jingles this approach is.

This is not meant to be yet another Internet jeremiad over the "problems" of the Church. My hope is to find more believers that seek to make art to glorify God and edify man. I openly acknowledge that some of these views of art have resulted in great contributions to Christianity and the Arts. And nearly all of these views have kernels of truth to them. But I am disappointed to find so few believers interested in the arts in a way that is Biblically sound and aesthetically excellent. Perhaps I'm just looking in the wrong places.