the title of this post is meant to get attention. this post will probably be rather long but i hope it is informative and encouraging and beneficial to you.
fairly recently i was challenged by someone very close to me about my music preference. they noticed that i openly advocated listening to a particular band that is less-than favorable to Christians, Christianity and a biblical worldview (basically, they don’t like Christianity and openly attempt to discredit the faith in their songs); they are also occasionally vulgar and uncouth in their lyrics and use the most offensive words possible to convey their point. they openly rebel against authority and encourage others to do the same. also, i find them to be rather stoic (rejecting what is popular in society).
now why would a person who has been changed by Jesus and seeks to glorify Him and learn more about Him want to listen to such a band? a fair question, and i appreciate any friend of mine willing to challenge me on something they see to be a potential failing of mine. but i have an answer to that question. i think the best way for me to answer it is to show you how i listen to music of this kind, and in truth, any kind of music (even music called “Christian” can be destructive to a person’s spiritual growth if they are not careful. i have heard more heresy in some contemporary Christian music than i have in church history books. not really. that was an exaggeration. but i have heard a lot of heresy in Christian music.)
allow me to take a song that is as directly anti-Christian as they come and analyze it line-by-line as i do in my head when i listen to it.
sodom, gomorrah, washington d.c. — by anti-flag
first, what do i know of anti-flag? they are a political punk rock band (and, i think, excellent at what they do). they are socialists, they are against violence and war, they promote respect for all different people groups, they are very liberal. on the whole, i find their message to be one of love and hope. they are not always anti-Christian, in fact, this is one of the only songs i know of by them that challenges the church. they are mostly political. i listen to them because i love punk rock, they are good at it, they live what they preach, and they are passionate about what they have to say. let’s proceed…
“nailed to a cross/dead for collective sin/we decide where/why who and when”
“build our bibles to only include/the things that we believe to be divine and true”
“this is our right/this is our life/everyone homogenized”
ok. yikes. the first person identified in this opening track is none other than my Savior, Jesus. right there, an arrow is shot at the core of who i am. “nailed to a cross/dead for collective sin” – right there i see that these people have a correct understanding of the Christian view of the person of Jesus. they know that Jesus was crucified for people’s sin. i can also tell that they reject this view.
“we decide where/why who and when/build our bibles to only include/the things that we believe to be divine and true” – the challenge is against Scripture here. the accusation they are making is that the leadership of the church intentionally organizes the text of Scripture to suit their own purposes. this is where i identify their first misunderstanding. we do not “build our bibles” today. the texts that we have, we have had for thousands of years (well… almost thousands…). the organization of the bible that we have today was a very arduous process. each book of the bible was carefully examined and chosen under a number of different criteria such as… apostolic authorship, circulated use in the early church, etc. i do not intend a full account on the origin of our New Testament, just trying to make the point, we do not “build our bibles” today.
this helps me to see the lack of value in the following lyric, “this is our right/this is our life/everyone homogenized.” this statement points to conspiracy, that the church conspires to make everyone the same (homogenized — to make uniform or similar) so that they can be controlled. first, we do not build our bibles today. so you can’t blame us for what they say. blame irenaeus. or someone like that. second, a true church does not want everyone homogenized. a true church wants everyone to bring their own unique gifts and abilities to the table for the glory of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27).
so take that first verse from anti-flag.
to the chorus…
“sodom, gomorrah, washinton dc/smited into oblivion with blood, wrath and disease”
“sheep in shepherd’s clothing”
i assume the readers of this blog know the story of sodom and gomorrah… why the identification with washington dc? i assume that they are implying that the seat of government for the united states is worthy of destruction if anyone is (they are, after all, anti-flag), and they are also making a link between the church and government — that the government uses Christianity to control people, hence the clergy are “sheep in shepherd’s clothing.” they are led and controlled, but are meant to be perceived as leaders.
i am going to keep off the political discussion at this point. i am analyzing this song theologically, not politically for the benefit of Christians and a Christian worldview, not a political worldview. that being said, i reject the identification of the church and government. it is a shame to me that people equate the church of Christ, the citizens of an eternal kingdom, with a fallible earthly kingdom. i can understand where the view comes from, but it is not biblical. instead of looking at the church and seeing Jesus they look and see white, middle-class republican. that is bad.
a challenging chorus to be sure. verse two…
“yahweh, Jesus and mohammad/their words have way more in common”
“than the midwest or the middle east like to preach/it’s a tragedy/it’s a strategy”
“to prey on contrast/to not indulge fact/divide, conquer, subcontract”
now here, i see something very interesting. the statement is that judaism, Christianity and islam have “way more in common” than is professed by their followers. they are saying that the Scriptures (torah, bible, koran) share similar worldviews. they are not naturally in conflict with each other. this is freaking true! yahweh and Jesus are, in truth, the same entity (God), only different members of the Trinity so… all of their words are in common! in fact, the jewish Scriptures are part of our Christian Scriptures. well that was easy. what about islam? i would not presume to say that the koran agrees with Scripture or that it is on the same ground as far as being inspired of God. but i do know that the koran holds a favorable opinion of Jesus Himself and of His followers — though it does NOT affirm Him as God! while there are certainly many points of contradiction between these two texts (bible and koran) there are words to be found in common.
“than the midwest of the middle east like to preach/it’s a tragedy, it’s a strategy” — unfortunately i must concede this point to them as well. they are noticing when Christians are not being biblical. there is violence between these two worldviews. killing. war. while i know of some wonderful Christians who love muslims and live among them and give their lives for them, i also know of other “Christians” who encourage this violence instead of encouraging Christlike love. i differ with the last line… i don’t think it is a strategy, but it is certainly a tragedy.
quick disclaimer: i am not arguing against a government’s war here. i am merely stating that Christians should love.
“to prey on contrast/to not indulge fact/divide, conquer, subcontract” — this phrase suggesting that the truth is withheld from the people and the contrasts are enlarged instead of the similarities for the purpose of domination and violence. while it is important for Christians to hold to the inspiration of Scripture does not mean that we need to be ignorant of the worldviews of others. it is our responsibility to know what we believe and educate ourselves so that we can be as effective and as understanding as possible.
another quick disclaimer: i am not suggesting that the koran and the bible are anywhere near equal. i believe that the bible is God’s Word. i believe that that the koran is not.
back to the chorus. on to the concluding bridge…
“the Scriptures/are not as cryptic as they seem”
“the pages serve the sick and poor/not the capitalists of endless war”
notice please… they are revealing a favorable opinion of “the Scriptures” in this phrase. they appreciate the Scriptures. the words in the Scriptures are not cryptic — they are about HOPE. the pages of Scripture SERVE the sick and poor. oh that the church would stop fighting and start serving! it is at this point that i would like to THANK this anti-Christian band for challenging me to be biblical. i can take this word to heart, stop fighting, and start serving. so we see that these guys have, to a certain degree, an appreciation for the words of Scripture. what would it mean to them if they saw the church living those things that they appreciate about it? could it change their opinion of Christianity? could they see Jesus in a new light?
back to the chorus. now the concluding punchline…
“religion is the opiate of the weak”
ouch. way to hold nothing back. this is the first time in the song they are not talking about the leadership of the church but rather the laity, the people. they are suggesting that religion is used by people as a drug to numb themselves because they can’t handle the truth.
i don’t think Christianity fits that train of thought. actually, i’m sure it doesn’t. Christianity is not a drug to numb reality, it is God’s expression of love to a fallen humanity. it is not as though there are the “strong” who have no need of religion and the “weak” who are the ones who “use” religion, Christianity is because everyone is weak and needs Jesus to save them. Christianity is not the opiate of the weak, it may be “folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” 1 Corinthians 1:18.
so what do i get out of listening to this song?
1. awesome music.
2. an opportunity to know another person’s view of what i live for.
3. an opportunity to challenge myself on what i believe and to further strengthen my foundation.
4. an opportunity to correct the misunderstandings of someone and to present Christ to them for who He is, not for what He is incorrectly perceived to be.
some final thoughts and encouragements:
why do i, as a Christian, listen to music that is not only not Christians but intentionally anti-Christian? because it makes me a better Christian. i have a more solid foundation because i tested it and it stood. i have the ability to relate to people who think this way and show them their errors and present them with the truth.
the last quick disclaimer: i do not listen to this music all the time. i listen to it because i love punk rock. however, to feed myself only on negative things will, in the end, be damaging to me. it is best to make what you listen to be Christ-exalting positive music (it’s out there, believe it or not!). however, it is good to challenge yourself. this approach can be applied to anything that advocates a worldview… books, movies, music… positive should be your steady diet, challenging can help you to be stronger.
i encourage you to challenge yourself. if you do not, you will have a weak foundation and someday it will collapse. this song did not shake me. it challenged me, but it did not shake me. if you would find yourself shaken by statements like this than i would encourage you to strengthen your foundation before challenging yourself by reading good books on history, theology and apologetics. true ones. also having conversations with wise people in authority — good pastors.
this post was entirely too long and i applaud those of you who have read this entire thing. this is how i listen to music. i hope that reading this was beneficial to you.
exhausted,
mark.
Filed under: music | 8 Comments
Long post, bro. As a Christian, as long as this doesn’t violate your conscience, I think it is OK to listen to for the purposes you mentioned. However, I would not openly endorse them or encourage others to listen. Someone else’s conscience may not be as strong as yours (I’m sorta referring to Romans 14 teaching here) and it may be harmful to their faith, actually. A verse I like to use is “for whatever does not proceed from faith is sin (Romans 14:23). If you can listen to this and give glory to God through your listening, then go for it.
Make sense?
absolutely makes sense. thanks.
upon further reflection, i’m afraid i’m going to have to disagree with you bro. i appreciate what you say and i know what you mean, but i think that Christians need to be aware of what the “world” thinks of them. to not do so would be doing a disservice to them and keeping them from growing. it would also be doing a disservice to those who think this way.
for entertainment purposes music like this (that is, music that hates Christianity) should not be used a lot. for the purposes of developing the faith of Christians, i encourage it wholeheartedly. it is GOOD for them to hear this and talk about it. i am convinced of that.
Interesting thoughts.
A few things to consider as well: first, we need to recognize that God, as sovereign author of all truth, is not limited in how or through whom his truth is revealed (c.f Balaam); second, though fallen, as persons created in the image of God our natural “tendency” is to reflect that image–the Christ-follower, then, must use discernment to examine the many “images” in the world and recognize those that rightly reflect the image of God (regardless of where we find it); third, that same discernment is needed to be sure that we are not actually compromising the foundations of our faith by arbitrarily testing them (as santhara pointed out).
You bring up a good point here, Mark. I’m glad you posted this. We don’t want to be Christians who just say things are bad without serious Scriptural reflection. It is also very helpful to know what non-Christians think about us. I think we should approach all our music listening (as well as all media intake) with this. However, I think there is a difference between simply knowing what Christian-haters think about you and openly loving and endorsing their music for others. I would very much hesitate to point a new Christian towards this music. I also would have a hard time listening to it in the first place. I can know what a band believes and still not listen to all their music all the time. Sometimes I just like to read interviews of bands to hear what their worldview is and then implement the thinking you mentioned. I don’t want to become passionate about it, though.
Love you, bro.
I’ll throw my hat into the ring here, since I love this band, too.
Good work, man. Definitely a challenging piece. It delves deep into what Christians need to hear and consider in terms of not only worldly opinion of the church, but also art and music in general, and I fully agree with your stance. Though, like Dave, I would be hesitant to point new Christians in the direction of an Anti-Flag CD (for their own sake) I think I would definitely point them out to someone serious about being a Christian and living for Christ in the world about them, specifically for the purpose of helping them understand world opinion (even if I do question how educated Anti-Flag can be sometimes).
You mentioned entertainment in your one comment. Here we’re definitely hitting a matter of convictions amongst Christians, as this may not be something the weak may want to indulge in, but for the weak to attempt to criticize the strong is just as bad as the strong looking down upon the weak. I see this a lot in churches who don’t fully understand the implications of Romans 14, and it makes me sad. Just because someone is convicted against listening to a band, doesn’t mean you have to be.
Anyway, I basically just repeated what you said. Good stuff, man
good thoughts bro. ‘preciate it.
thanks frank and pat, good thoughts.