Relient K

[Ian]

I know. I hate it when people force the lyrics.

Yeah, me too.  Love Kutless though.


sorry, couldn't help it >.>

[NewDimension]

I think that listening to enough of that sort of thing tends to stifle creative thought over time, and give Christians a false worldview that is overly black-and-white and encourages snap judgments rather than thoughtful discernment. Judging from some of your comments so far, you're not there yet. My hope is that you never get there. I've been there before and it's a horrible place to be.

It sounds horrible, that's why you're so opposed to it.

That's the cruz of our disagreement, I think. The kind of harm that I think bands like Kutless do to the minds of Christians is a subtle enough type that it's hard to detect, and I can understand why I usually get a hostile response when I suggest that this is happening. People don't like being told that the thing they're comfortable with might actually be bad for them.

Parts of it could be bad in subtle ways, at the same time, it could be really good in many other ways. And it's true, when something has even a small amount of potential in causing harm to someone in someway, the harm it can cause should not be overlooked. Whether an individual who listens to the music that has this type of potential, if they become affected by the possible harm it can cause, I think, laregly depends on that individual in: what they percieve from the music, if they have a relationship with God, and how strong and firm their relationship is with Him, and how rooted in His Word they are, that they can detect and/or avoid accepting any harmful influences it may cause overtime by, carelessly accepting and not analyzing whatever you hear. And that is why people should seek to write music that is blameless in things that can be harmful, deceptive, or misleading to Christians or non-Christians
in any way. That's why the people who make the music should always scrutinize their music in as many ways as they possibly can to look for flaws and errors or to see if something could be misleading or harmful in someway and to see what they will be interpreting to those who hear it, and they shoud do this extremely often in the writing process. And that's another reason why I think Christians who write music whether it's intended for listeners who are Christian or non-Christians or both, should pray about what they write and how they write it, before and during and even after they write a song.

If you can acknowledge that, then by all means, please keep looking.

Of course I'll keep looking, I love finding new stuff.

And hey, I have my guilty pleasure favorites that I still go back to who really aren't that brilliant or all that spiritually wholesome, but who are just plain fun - I just try not to make them the main staple of my diet. And I try not to pretend they're anything more than what they are.

I was with you up until the whole spiritually wholesome part, and then I got reminded about some Scripture. Sorry about mentioning Scripture and all, but it does come to my mind a lot when I don't go trying to think about it.

While my tastes run more melodic and make it hard for me to spend too much time listening to a genre of music that is mostly spoken word (the rappers I like tend to be more poppy, and thus they tend to get written off by hardcore hip-hop heads), I have a lot of respect for rap as a genre because, at least at its best, it is about the words and the way that they flow and the tricky ways that they can rhyme and so forth. A lot of rappers have a keen mind for interesting metaphors, too. I figure they have to push themselves to say something interesting - at least the good ones - because they have to spit out more words per song than your average pop or rock singer.

 I expected a lot of rap to be shorter than an average song from any other genre, and I've found lots of rap songs that are longer than the length of most normal songs, which surprised me.  

Of course, there's the cliche about rap being really superficial and violent and misogynistic. It depends on who you're listening to.

It does depend on who you're listening to just like it does with every other type of music.

Jars of Clay is already at the top of my list, as you know. Relient K and Switchfoot get high marks from me as well. I love the way that John Reuben's mind works; he isn't afraid to step on toes when he needs to, but he's also got a self-deprecating sense of humor. I generally enjoy Delirious?'s songs, but sometimes I feel like Martin Smith gets lazy with his songwriting. Still, they're one of the better "modern worship" bands and they're really one of the ones that got the genre going on a larger scale - and I wish that the CCM industry would have the good sense to leave that type of songwriting to the pros like them and like Matt Redman, etc., instead of everybody and their brother feeling like they have to force themselves to write "worship songs" to get radio play.

I don't think Delirous? is as good as they could be either, which is why I don't listen to their music much, but they are creative at times. So do you think Matt Redman is a good songwriter?

Yet.

Not yet, but lately I haven't been listening to it as a whole as much as I use to.

Well, duh. There's not much else to the music. Be more specific.

Fine then.
I usually don't like it when: people scream all throughout their songs, try to sound like someone they're not,  or pretty much repeat the same words ALL throughout the song, I think people scream/sing "yeah" too much in a lot of songs, I think falsettos are overused and magnified too much, I think there are too many runs in some songs, I think there's too many people who aren't that great at vocals out there being vocalists; I think people mumble too much in songs, they don't pronounce the words very properly, and/or they just don't let you hear what the words are clearly, I don't think people bring the vocals out as loudly as they should during certain parts of songs sometimes, I also think some people try to force their vocals too much, I don't like whining much in songs either, is there anything else with the vocals I reallly don't like? Let me see, I'm probably forgetting a bunch of stuff. Also, some vocals just irratate me even if the person can sing. When it comes to the actual music, there's a varitety of things I like and don't like, which is hard to explain without you actually hearing it. I love musical diversity altogether, different instruments, different tempos (fast, slow, mid-tempo, all of it), different arrangements, different decibels, all kinds of experiments, not the same thing all the time. There's probably a bunch of stuff I'm forgetting on this as well. I like lyrics that are creative, challenging, encouraging, hopeful, something new and different, something you don't hear that often, something that catches your ear when you don't expect it, something that gives you something to meditate on, something that requires your focus in order to get to the depth of what's being said, something that you can apply to your life, something that will help you grow in your relationship with God, something you can learn from, something with passion and boldness, that's real and raw; that's die-hard in taking a stand for something that's right, but with a loving and humbling approach that draws the listener into it even more. And, I love songs that magnify God, whether directly or indirectly......there is SO many other types of lyrics I like, but I don't think I could ever list them all.....I love it when people write songs that you don't expect to be written. And unfortunetly people I like, do things I don't like, which I think is terrible. And of course this is all subject to change.

How can you tell?

You can't always tell, but sometimes songs just seem like they're being performed and the person isn't meaning what they're singing. Sometimes you can discern it.

Guilty as charged. You can't blame me for trying.

I actually figured that out.

But once you realize it's terrible, and there are better things out there for you, why keep going back to it.

Because you haven't found many other better things that are out there.

It's like my McDonald's analogy. It kept you from starving when you were a bum on the street who had to take any handouts you can get. Now you know where to get more wholesome food. Sure, we all like some cheap fast food from time to time, and I don't think that's so bad, but to make a regular habit of it? That makes me worry for a person's health in the long run.

Not really, I haven't found that much music that is a lot better, especially something I might actually like, that's why you experiment with what you don't like. Actually, I think the Word of God should be our main source of daily food. With me, the music is just like the appetizers, snacks, desserts, etc..... it's not the main course, and I don't think it ever should be, because nothing can ever replace something God has directly spoke. Which is one reason why, I haven't listened to music as much as I use to lately. If that's your primary source, you'll eventually end up lacking protein and other essential nutrients that you need to survive. Even in this, music should have a vast amount of protein and nutrients, etc... in it, that those who don't feed off the main course on a regular basis, get enough of the indredients it contains with every swallow, which may take sometime to digest. This is why, I don't like eating at fast foods as much as I do at the King's table.  

Awesome. So Kutless is a seedy dive on the wrong side of the tracks where you can get cheap beer.

Oh wait, they think it's a sin to go to places like that. Fine. So Kutless is AM/PM.

They should have explained what I expained and rephrased some things in that song, because it could be really good song, I mean, it already is to me, but the songwriting could be a lot more optimal for average listeners.
You do realize there is lots of good and healthy stuff at AM/PM's, right? Sure there's a lot of junk food, but weigh it all out. And I don't think Kutless has as much junk food as you claim, at least it's not with me. I know you hate specifying songs, but I really would like to know if you think "Vow" is junk food?

We all have our preferences, and that's fine. I've tried and tried and not managed to like certain genres or methods of recording music. (Most anything lo-fi sounds dull to my ears; some other folks here thrive on that stuff while cringing at anything that sounds very slickly produced.) The important thing is giving it that old college try, and challenging your perceptions of what ingredients are necessary to make music "good", and asking yourself why you see it that way. I think some of the best art in the world is the type where people look at it and their gut reaction is, "Huh? This is art? I don't get it."

I'm not so sure abstract art is the best. It can be good, but other types of art are extremely hard to make and can be just as good. I'm not sure I would say any one type of art, in itsself, is the best, that's why there's always experimentation.

Artistism? I think you just made up a word there, Dubya.

I know, isn't it great. I do love making up words, you should try it. It's really artistic.

We've had our debates about which element is most important. I see it as more of a symbiosis between different ingredients that depend on each other to make the whole thing work. I agree with you that on some level, I need to emotionally respond to something, otherwise I can't get into it even if I have a lot of respect for its artistic integrity. I need an access point somewhere. But if it's all touchy-feely emotion and I feel like every effort is being made to do what the audience expects to get them to feel something in the quickest, easiest way possible, it just strikes me as pandering. I like having a little something to figure out. I like that the whole structure is still appealing and intriguing when I look more carefully at the nuts and bolts holding it up. I like when the listener is rewarded for paying attention to the details. Some of my favorite artists are actually the ones who can be very catchy and win people over almost instantly with what's on the surface, but also show a lot of depth and not be forgettable once you've digested the basic hooks and played the thing to death and moved on to the next catchy craze. It's very hard to do both at once.

And since it is hard to do both at once, that's why I don't like much of the music that's out there. That truly is awesome when you find a band comprised with both elements, which I haven't found many, if any, of. I don't think everything in a song is about an emotional connection. Even if I can connect to God through it, that doesn't mean the other elements don't matter to me. I usually need at least some of both, in what I listen to.

More of an armchair theologian, I guess.

So does that make you like a Bible scholar or something?

I like one FFH song ("One of These Days"). I can see how God used that one as a pick-me-up during a weary phase of my life. It doesn't mean I'm gonna give FFH a pass for the rest of their bland crapola, though.

NP: "Sing for the Submarine", R.E.M.

And that's exactly why I don't listen to them much at all.

[NewDimension]

Yeah, me too.  Love Kutless though.


sorry, couldn't help it >.>

That's okay, you don't have to be sorry about this specific comment. You just give me all the more reason to talk about them. Bravo! Not really about them though, about God....and I love talking about God, don't you?
It's not really so much that I just love Kutless and think their music is the greatest, it's that I love the times that I encounter Christ and learn to live His way, and love Him wholeheartedly, and become less and less like me everyday, and that's what happens when I listen to their music. I could go on.....shall I? Whether they force the lyrics or not, or just don't put enough thought into them, I don't know which it is, their lyrical writing could definetely improve. I wonder if it has yet.

[RedcoatJones]

I wouldn't say most, but I can think of at least three of us who do. There seems to be a decent cluster in the vicinity of Tennessee/North Carolina/Virginia as well.

And one lone rep of Atlanta (though another used to live here before leaving for Baton Rouge recently). And I know we have at least one New Zealander.

Oh ... and to stay on topic ... I was kind of a late arriver to the Relient K party, so I only own the two most recent albums (Mmhmm and Five Score). Both are very solid, though I do like Sadie Hopkins Dance a lot as well.

Some of my favorites (no particular order):
Come Right Out and Say It
Deathbed
Forgiven
Devastation and Reform
Which to Bury, Us or the Hatchet/Let it All Out
Who I Am Hates Who I've Been
Sadie Hopkins Dance
I So Hate Consequences
High of '75

[ajyouthguy]

It was hot. How hot was it where you guys are at? Do most people here live in SoCal or something?

i dun live in Ark-can-saw

[murlough23]

You've got to remember I love posting at unusual hours. I do live in the Pacific Time zone though, and the Pacific Time zone is in parts of Canada, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, and Mexico, plus where ever it begins or ends in the ocean, am I forgetting anymore places it exists?

I think you just about covered them all. I think most of the northern states you mentioned get cold enough that people aren't wusses about 60-degree weather, and even among the southern locations (parts of Nevada, Arizona, and Utah), a lot of it's desert, which can still get pretty darn cold in the winter. So I figure those folks would be used to the temperature extremes.

However, I hadn't considered Mexico. In general, you've got me stumped as to your locale.

I've never even been to L.A. or San Diego yet. So what's your definition of super-cold?

I'm generally comfy down to about 50, though I prefer temps in the 70s and 80s. If it's in the 50s, I probably won't bother putting on a sweater to go outside unless I'm going to be out there for more than a few minutes. Below 50, I start to get cranky, especially in the morning. But that's very rare here. The lowest we ever get in L.A. seems to be the high 30s.

Every now and then it's fun to travel to places that get colder - I had the unique experience of being in Las Vegas last January, and slipping on ice on the sidewalk and seeing a small fountain outside one of the casinos completely frozen over - it was low 30s all weekend, and it got down to 22 as we passed over the hills near the California state line on the way home. Coldest temperature I've ever driven in. (The hottest would be 115, during Labor Day weekend last year.)

I know. I hate it when people force the lyrics.

When you notice it, anyway.

If that's what a hot summer is. The sun sure does a good job of that everyday, no matter what the temperature is.

Sure, but I was talking about the idea that, on average, it's only gonna get hotter and hotter every year.

That sound like the ancronym it produces: SAD. That doesn't really happen to me much, I can adjust to most temperatures year-round. I don't like it if it's extremely cold or hot though, but overall it doesn't really matter much to me. There's lots of awesome advantages to it being really hot, cold, or an in-between temp; I like all kinds of weather in moderation.

With me it's more lack of daylight than anything else. There was one year in college that I got really depressed and I eventually correlated it to the fact that I lived on the bottom floor of a dormitory with a view of a wall outside my window. And it was winter, and I had late classes, so I was close to nocturnal some days. For some folks, it doesn't do good things to the brain.

The time change in the fall is always a bummer for me... everyone else is all happy about an extra hour of sleep, and I'm like, "So what? Now I get to go home in the dark every day for four months!" At least now it's four months instead of close to six...

I do have Seasonal Affective Disorder spiritually sometimes though, which is probably why I like songs that talk about the weather as much as I do.

Weather is a pretty well-used metaphor, but you can do a lot with it if you know how to be descriptive instead of just talking about basic things like sun and rain and figuring everyone already knows what they represent. (Rain's kind of a funny one in Christian music, because I've heard it used to represent trials and also to represent God's healing... sometimes even in the same song when the songwriter wasn't paying attention. One thing I like about the Jars of Clay song "I Need You" is how they acknowledge the apparent contradiction by saying "You are the shelter from the rain and the rain to wash me away.")

The high where I'm at, was not quite as high as it was where you are at.

Wildfires are terrible, last year there was so many in different parts of the US. So do they call bad air quaity where you live polution or smog, or do they just call it bad air quality? Los Angeles isn't in a valley, is it?

Parts of it are - I live in the San Gabriel Valley (there's currently a wildfire mucking up our air quality, and yes, I think all of your descriptions of bad air quality are commonly used terms around here), and there's also the San Fernando Valley (best known for Valley Girls, Paul Thomas Anderson films, and porn.) Both are in the foothills, so the hot, musty air and smog often get trapped here. It kind of sucks, but it's where I grew up and what I'm used to.

NP: "Half of Our Lives", Sanctus Real feat. Katie Herzig

[murlough23]

It sounds horrible, that's why you're so opposed to it.

It is horrible; I know this from looking back on my own experience as a clueless young adult.

And it's true, when something has even a small amount of potential in causing harm to someone in someway, the harm it can cause should not be overlooked.

OK, so knowing this, why still listen to the harmful stuff?

Now I'll make it clear that I'm trying to be reasonable about this - anything could be used for harm if you really try hard enough. And any songwriter could be misinterpreted. I'm more concerned with how things are commonly going to be understood than with the most out-there interpretation that could possibly lead somebody astray.

I was with you up until the whole spiritually wholesome part, and then I got reminded about some Scripture. Sorry about mentioning Scripture and all, but it does come to my mind a lot when I don't go trying to think about it.

Thanks for the completely unhelpful side comment there, Mary Sue.

I don't think Delirous? is as good as they could be either, which is why I don't listen to their music much, but they are creative at times.

The thing I like about Delirious? is that they could have done the easy thing and kept cranking out U2-styled worship anthems like the ones that made them popular, but they've continued to experiment with their sound and their subject matter. They're known as a worship band, but they don't force all of their songs to fit inside that box. They've certainly had experiments that have failed, and for a while there I felt like they cared a little bit too much about having a hit on Radio One and whatnot, but I think now they're comfortable enough in their own skin to write whatever they feel like writing and not care if it follows the CCM vernacular or not. They still wear their influences on their sleeve a bit too much, but they put out consistently good records. I'm no longer the huge fan I was in the days of Mezzamorhpis and Glo, but I still consider them to be well above average.

So do you think Matt Redman is a good songwriter?

Yes. I think he puts a lot of thought into the Scriptural roots behind his songs and manages to express himself in an intelligent way while also writing songs that are easy for the Church to pick up and use in their services (even if we do overplay them a bit just due to name recognition). I've heard the guy speak at one of his concerts - normally not something I'd consider a highlight, but he's actually a really smart guy and he has a sense of humor and a love for wordplay. (The guy named his daughter "Maisey", because spelled backwards, it says, "Yes I am".)

The funny thing is that I don't own any of his albums. When he tours, he's generally got a top-notch backing band and it's a solid show, both from a technical perspective and a "genuine worship experience" perspective.

You can't always tell, but sometimes songs just seem like they're being performed and the person isn't meaning what they're singing. Sometimes you can discern it.

Just like how sometimes I can discern that the person doesn't really understand the meaning of what they're singing, but just threw some catchphrases in there to make things rhyme or to get a cheer from the crowd.

Because you haven't found many other better things that are out there.

That's a pretty lame excuse. Why haven't you found them? Probably because you've taken what was handed to you by Christian radio and the CCM subculture instead of really doing some digging on your own. It takes some effort, but it's not really that difficult to find intelligent Christian music. (And even some of what Christian radio throws at you does fit the bill, actually.)

Not really, I haven't found that much music that is a lot better, especially something I might actually like, that's why you experiment with what you don't like. Actually, I think the Word of God should be our main source of daily food. With me, the music is just like the appetizers, snacks, desserts, etc..... it's not the main course, and I don't think it ever should be, because nothing can ever replace something God has directly spoke. Which is one reason why, I haven't listened to music as much as I use to lately. If that's your primary source, you'll eventually end up lacking protein and other essential nutrients that you need to survive. Even in this, music should have a vast amount of protein and nutrients, etc... in it, that those who don't feed off the main course on a regular basis, get enough of the indredients it contains with every swallow, which may take sometime to digest. This is why, I don't like eating at fast foods as much as I do at the King's table.

I think you're mixing metaphors here. I'm not looking to music to replace actual spiritual nourishment; at best, it can only augment that. I wouldn't recommend that someone use Christian music as their source for teaching, and not go to church or read their Bible or anything. That's not what I'm suggesting.

But I think that listening to a lot of the mediocre, not-so-intelligently created Christian music can kind of undermine whatever solid teaching and fellowship you are getting spiritual nourishment from if you're not careful. I say this because I've been to churches where the entire service seems to be infected by the dumbed-down mindset of the musicians invited to perform there. Who knows, maybe it's the other way around and bands like Kutless just come from churches who preach a "Keep it simple, stupid" sort of philosophy, but it seems to me that both feed each other; it's a cycle.

And whether you see it as a primary source of nourishment or not, I think the words do affect a person's thoughts. That doesn't mean "Never listen to anything that isn't 100% theologically accurate", because nobody is, and you've got to allow some room for creative license when people are speaking about their individual relationships with God (i.e. something might not sound totally accurate based on what you know of God, but they're merely going from their incomplete personal experience, and I think that's fine if you see it more as a friend sharing what they know so far, and not a teaching). It also doesn't mean "Never listen to secular music", because I listen to plenty, some of which I disagree with from an ideological standpoint. But it means that one has to pay attention and decide where they stand and not let the music tell you where to stand. Maybe it'll cause you to think hard about some things - but  think good songwriting poses questions and lets you search your own heart (and in Christian music's case, the Bible and the things you've been taught) for the answers.

They should have explained what I expained and rephrased some things in that song, because it could be really good song, I mean, it already is to me, but the songwriting could be a lot more optimal for average listeners.

So there's some healthy junk in there, but plenty of preservatives. It won't kill you, sure, but don't eat it all the time.

You do realize there is lots of good and healthy stuff at AM/PM's, right? Sure there's a lot of junk food, but weigh it all out.

Sure, but what do people generally go there for?

And I don't think Kutless has as much junk food as you claim, at least it's not with me.

Most of the songs that don't say something outright idiotic are trying to express solid truths in extremely stunted ways, as if the band barely grasps the concepts they're trying to sell other people on. It also seems reflected in the way these guys talk in interviews - maybe they've got some really solid theology in their heads for all I know, but it's like they struggle to form thoughtful sentences. In reality it's probably a bit of both - some really misguided but well-intentions ideas, and some genuinely good ideas that they simply lack the skill to express in profound ways.

I know you hate specifying songs, but I really would like to know if you think "Vow" is junk food?

"Vow" is among the worst of the worst, as far as I'm concerned. It's just plain naive. Nobody ever keeps the kind of promises made in that song. They try, and they mean well when they make them, but they always fail. Makes sense - of course they're gonna fail, because they're sinners and that's why they need Jesus in the first place. I'm not saying, "Never make any promises to God because you know you're gonna break 'em", but come on... "I'll never think twice?" Sure you will. Everybody's tempted, even the ones who manage to resist it, they all at least have the thoughts cross their minds. The song promises too much. Basically it sets Christian kids up to think they can be invincible from this point forward, and to end up really disappointed and pissed off at themselves when they fail later on, because hey, those guys in Kutless can make vows like that and keep them (at least, as far as the song seems to indicate), so what, am I just a screw-up who was never really serious about this Christian thing?

I'm not so sure abstract art is the best. It can be good, but other types of art are extremely hard to make and can be just as good. I'm not sure I would say any one type of art, in itsself, is the best, that's why there's always experimentation.

No one type is the best; I'm just tired of the most straightforward types of art always being dominant while the rest are disrespected and looked down on for being less useful.

I know, isn't it great. I do love making up words, you should try it. It's really artistic.

I usually make one up on purpose when I do it, and put it in quotes to indicate that I'm aware it's not really a word.

And since it is hard to do both at once, that's why I don't like much of the music that's out there.

And yet you've settled for a band that does neither particularly well.

So does that make you like a Bible scholar or something?

No. There's certainly a lot more that I could stand to know about the immense details contained within the Bible. I'm just a person who is interested in investigating whether the music that Christians make really reflect the things that we say we believe about God, or whether, due to a lack of skill or insight, they insinuate false things about God to people who might not know any better.

And that's exactly why I don't listen to them much at all.

Good job.

I skipped part of your post, because you've got a pretty meaty list of dislikes about music that I will have to address later.

[Aaron]

Speaking of Delirious?, the new album might be the best they've ever released.  It blew me away. I wasn't expecting it to be so good. 

[murlough23]

Speaking of Delirious?, the new album might be the best they've ever released.  It blew me away. I wasn't expecting it to be so good. 

That surprises me, because my reaction is that it's more or less what I expected of them at this point, with the occasional surprise. I like it, but I'm not blown away. The Mission Bell was perhaps a bit under par, but I think they have yet to put out a disappointing album (save for Touch, which was only disappointing because it was a drastically edited version of its UK counterpart).

[Aaron]

That surprises me, because my reaction is that it's more or less what I expected of them at this point, with the occasional surprise. I like it, but I'm not blown away. The Mission Bell was perhaps a bit under par, but I think they have yet to put out a disappointing album (save for Touch, which was only disappointing because it was a drastically edited version of its UK counterpart).

I was blown away because I wasn't expecting a more modern rock sound.  I was expecting more of the british pop/rock sound but it seems they took some cues from a lot of american modern rock.  I don't think this album is top 10 of the year but it's a very good album, much more than I expect of Delirious nowadays.

[dgp11776]

I think it's their best studio album since Glo, and possibly their second best studio album by my count.

[murlough23]

I was blown away because I wasn't expecting a more modern rock sound.  I was expecting more of the british pop/rock sound but it seems they took some cues from a lot of american modern rock.  I don't think this album is top 10 of the year but it's a very good album, much more than I expect of Delirious nowadays.

It's Top 10 for me right now because I haven't heard a ton of 2008 releases yet. We'll see if it actually stays there.

I think it's their best studio album since Glo, and possibly their second best studio album by my count.

I have such a sentimental attachment to their turn-of-the-century material that it's gonna be hard to go back and re-evaluate objectively. Right now I'd say it's on par with World Service.

[Ian]

That's okay, you don't have to be sorry about this specific comment. You just give me all the more reason to talk about them. Bravo! Not really about them though, about God....and I love talking about God, don't you?

Nope.

i dun live in Ark-can-saw

What town?  I'm in Siloam Springs :3

[danny316]

"Vow" is among the worst of the worst, as far as I'm concerned. It's just plain naive. Nobody ever keeps the kind of promises made in that song. They try, and they mean well when they make them, but they always fail. Makes sense - of course they're gonna fail, because they're sinners and that's why they need Jesus in the first place. I'm not saying, "Never make any promises to God because you know you're gonna break 'em", but come on... "I'll never think twice?" Sure you will. Everybody's tempted, even the ones who manage to resist it, they all at least have the thoughts cross their minds. The song promises too much. Basically it sets Christian kids up to think they can be invincible from this point forward, and to end up really disappointed and pissed off at themselves when they fail later on, because hey, those guys in Kutless can make vows like that and keep them (at least, as far as the song seems to indicate), so what, am I just a screw-up who was never really serious about this Christian thing?

I didn't realize that Kutless did that - that's the kind of crap that makes me say that Christian rock is more emotion-based than related to scripture. From Matthew 5, NIV:

33"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

It's a slightly different context, but I think the idea of simply saying yes or no instead of making ridiculous vows or promises covers this sort of thing. Certainly Jesus discarding the idea of keeping oaths to the Lord in favor of just not making oaths ought to be taken more seriously.

On an interesting side note, this isn't unique to Christian music, either. What's with the way some of these mega-pastors go on with the Pledge of Allegiance? (I'm not sure if everyone here follows Shaun Groves' blog or not, but I agree with everything he's said regarding Christianity and nationalism)

I agree with your points too, from personal experience - trying to go all out like that is just asking for failure, and even if God forgives, it's a bit harder to ease up on yourself when you're talking yourself up that much. I think most young Christians also make the mistake I made about assuming that the right thing to do to follow God is always easy to figure out - there are plenty of times when leaders you trust start to conflict each other, and discerning which one really speaks what God would can be very difficult and painful.

[murlough23]

I didn't realize that Kutless did that - that's the kind of crap that makes me say that Christian rock is more emotion-based than related to scripture.

I wouldn't put all Christian rock in that box, but sure, it is an easy trap to fall into.

It's a balance, I guess. One one hand, "Be perfect as your Father  in Heaven is perfect". On the other hand, we're all depraved sinners, on equal footing with the worst of the worst. I can't let my realization of the latter give me license to just be lax and let myself get away with whatever just because I figure God will forgive me. But I also can't pretend that any amount of steeling myself is going to make me immune to obstacles and pitfalls. All I can do is promise to give it my best shot, and know that there will be plenty of grace when I fall - it just isn't wise to plan on falling or to see how much of it one can get away with.

[NewDimension]

All I can do is promise to give it my best shot, and know that there will be plenty of grace when I fall - it just isn't wise to plan on falling or to see how much of it one can get away with.

Which is why the second verse in that song is like it is. I shall post more of my thoughts about everything later.

[NewDimension]

I think you just about covered them all. I think most of the northern states you mentioned get cold enough that people aren't wusses about 60-degree weather, and even among the southern locations (parts of Nevada, Arizona, and Utah), a lot of it's desert, which can still get pretty darn cold in the winter. So I figure those folks would be used to the temperature extremes.

So how far north are these people who aren't wusses in 60-degree weather?

However, I hadn't considered Mexico. In general, you've got me stumped as to your locale.

Oh, goodie! Let's not forget to think analytical now....

I'm generally comfy down to about 50, though I prefer temps in the 70s and 80s. If it's in the 50s, I probably won't bother putting on a sweater to go outside unless I'm going to be out there for more than a few minutes. Below 50, I start to get cranky, especially in the morning. But that's very rare here. The lowest we ever get in L.A. seems to be the high 30s.

The lowest ever is in the high 30's, that's nice.

Every now and then it's fun to travel to places that get colder - I had the unique experience of being in Las Vegas last January, and slipping on ice on the sidewalk and seeing a small fountain outside one of the casinos completely frozen over - it was low 30s all weekend, and it got down to 22 as we passed over the hills near the California state line on the way home. Coldest temperature I've ever driven in. (The hottest would be 115, during Labor Day weekend last year.)

I've been in 115 temps, unfortunetly I"ve never been in anything below 10 degrees though, at least not that I know of.

When you notice it, anyway.

It's not like I claim to notice it all the time.

Sure, but I was talking about the idea that, on average, it's only gonna get hotter and hotter every year.

I don't know if that's true; I mean, it could be, but I just don't know about it. I think it depends on the location also. Last year where I live, it was a fairly cooler summer, still hot, just not as hot as it usually gets as many days. However, I think this year it will be pretty hot. I don't know for sure if global warming it a hypothesis or reality; there's too much speculation.

With me it's more lack of daylight than anything else. There was one year in college that I got really depressed and I eventually correlated it to the fact that I lived on the bottom floor of a dormitory with a view of a wall outside my window. And it was winter, and I had late classes, so I was close to nocturnal some days. For some folks, it doesn't do good things to the brain.

Nocturnal is nice; so is sunlight.

The time change in the fall is always a bummer for me... everyone else is all happy about an extra hour of sleep, and I'm like, "So what? Now I get to go home in the dark every day for four months!" At least now it's four months instead of close to six... 

There's advantages and disadvantages to that also.

Weather is a pretty well-used metaphor, but you can do a lot with it if you know how to be descriptive instead of just talking about basic things like sun and rain and figuring everyone already knows what they represent. (Rain's kind of a funny one in Christian music, because I've heard it used to represent trials and also to represent God's healing... sometimes even in the same song when the songwriter wasn't paying attention. One thing I like about the Jars of Clay song "I Need You" is how they acknowledge the apparent contradiction by saying "You are the shelter from the rain and the rain to wash me away.")

There are different meanings to the "rain" metaphors. One song, that bugs me about the "sun" metaphor, is the one from Barlowgirl called "I Believe In Love". It says "I believe in the sun, even when it's not shining". That part of the song just throws it off for me, because I know that's how it "feels" like it is sometimes, but the sun never actually stops shining; it's the dark clouds that prevent our eyes from seeing it at the time.

Parts of it are - I live in the San Gabriel Valley (there's currently a wildfire mucking up our air quality, and yes, I think all of your descriptions of bad air quality are commonly used terms around here), and there's also the San Fernando Valley (best known for Valley Girls, Paul Thomas Anderson films, and porn.) Both are in the foothills, so the hot, musty air and smog often get trapped here. It kind of sucks, but it's where I grew up and what I'm used to.

I've also lived in a valley my whole life, but neither of those. When you venture to higher elevations, and you look down on the valley, and you see what you're actually breathing, you think, "Wow, I breathe that everyday," unless of course it rains or there's a good wind or something.....

[NewDimension]

OK, so knowing this, why still listen to the harmful stuff?

Now I'll make it clear that I'm trying to be reasonable about this - anything could be used for harm if you really try hard enough. And any songwriter could be misinterpreted. I'm more concerned with how things are commonly going to be understood than with the most out-there interpretation that could possibly lead somebody astray.

I look at the songs from a different perspective when I listen to them on my own, and I'm not trying to listen from someone else's perspective who may be a non-Christian or someone weak in their faith . Songs can be harmful in one retrospect, and helpful in another.

The thing I like about Delirious? is that they could have done the easy thing and kept cranking out U2-styled worship anthems like the ones that made them popular, but they've continued to experiment with their sound and their subject matter. They're known as a worship band, but they don't force all of their songs to fit inside that box. They've certainly had experiments that have failed, and for a while there I felt like they cared a little bit too much about having a hit on Radio One and whatnot, but I think now they're comfortable enough in their own skin to write whatever they feel like writing and not care if it follows the CCM vernacular or not. They still wear their influences on their sleeve a bit too much, but they put out consistently good records. I'm no longer the huge fan I was in the days of Mezzamorhpis and Glo, but I still consider them to be well above average.

I do think they're creative at times.

Yes. I think he puts a lot of thought into the Scriptural roots behind his songs and manages to express himself in an intelligent way while also writing songs that are easy for the Church to pick up and use in their services (even if we do overplay them a bit just due to name recognition). I've heard the guy speak at one of his concerts - normally not something I'd consider a highlight, but he's actually a really smart guy and he has a sense of humor and a love for wordplay. (The guy named his daughter "Maisey", because spelled backwards, it says, "Yes I am".)

The funny thing is that I don't own any of his albums. When he tours, he's generally got a top-notch backing band and it's a solid show, both from a technical perspective and a "genuine worship experience" perspective.

I like his songwriting also, and I don't own any of his cd's either. I think one reason we don't own his cd's is because we hear his songs so much already.

Just like how sometimes I can discern that the person doesn't really understand the meaning of what they're singing, but just threw some catchphrases in there to make things rhyme or to get a cheer from the crowd.

Different types of discernment.

That's a pretty lame excuse. Why haven't you found them? Probably because you've taken what was handed to you by Christian radio and the CCM subculture instead of really doing some digging on your own. It takes some effort, but it's not really that difficult to find intelligent Christian music. (And even some of what Christian radio throws at you does fit the bill, actually.)

It is a lame excuse, but it's an honest one. I never had the internet until recently, so of course the radio, television, and stuff you hear at churches is all that's going to mainly consist of what I've actually heard previously.

But I think that listening to a lot of the mediocre, not-so-intelligently created Christian music can kind of undermine whatever solid teaching and fellowship you are getting spiritual nourishment from if you're not careful. I say this because I've been to churches where the entire service seems to be infected by the dumbed-down mindset of the musicians invited to perform there. Who knows, maybe it's the other way around and bands like Kutless just come from churches who preach a "Keep it simple, stupid" sort of philosophy, but it seems to me that both feed each other; it's a cycle.

It is a vicious cycle.

And whether you see it as a primary source of nourishment or not, I think the words do affect a person's thoughts. That doesn't mean "Never listen to anything that isn't 100% theologically accurate", because nobody is, and you've got to allow some room for creative license when people are speaking about their individual relationships with God (i.e. something might not sound totally accurate based on what you know of God, but they're merely going from their incomplete personal experience, and I think that's fine if you see it more as a friend sharing what they know so far, and not a teaching). It also doesn't mean "Never listen to secular music", because I listen to plenty, some of which I disagree with from an ideological standpoint. But it means that one has to pay attention and decide where they stand and not let the music tell you where to stand. Maybe it'll cause you to think hard about some things - but  think good songwriting poses questions and lets you search your own heart (and in Christian music's case, the Bible and the things you've been taught) for the answers.

That's just it, there's too much music that has too many errors you can find in some way in it. I hate that.

So there's some healthy junk in there, but plenty of preservatives. It won't kill you, sure, but don't eat it all the time.

So how often is too often to eat something that can be good but also can have some perservatives in it?

Sure, but what do people generally go there for?

"Generally" is the accurate word. I don't listen to it on general terms. It's just like if you're eating a pizza and there's something you don't like on it or if it tastes like chemicals or something, you pick that piece off and throw it away. Not to say that the taste won't ever get in your mouth, but you won't digested it. The pizza still can be good. And yes, we know most pizza isn't that healthy.....you get the allegory.

Most of the songs that don't say something outright idiotic are trying to express solid truths in extremely stunted ways, as if the band barely grasps the concepts they're trying to sell other people on. It also seems reflected in the way these guys talk in interviews - maybe they've got some really solid theology in their heads for all I know, but it's like they struggle to form thoughtful sentences. In reality it's probably a bit of both - some really misguided but well-intentions ideas, and some genuinely good ideas that they simply lack the skill to express in profound ways.

I've heard some really good interviews from them. It probably is a bi of both.

"Vow" is among the worst of the worst, as far as I'm concerned. It's just plain naive. Nobody ever keeps the kind of promises made in that song. They try, and they mean well when they make them, but they always fail. Makes sense - of course they're gonna fail, because they're sinners and that's why they need Jesus in the first place. I'm not saying, "Never make any promises to God because you know you're gonna break 'em", but come on... "I'll never think twice?" Sure you will. Everybody's tempted, even the ones who manage to resist it, they all at least have the thoughts cross their minds. The song promises too much. Basically it sets Christian kids up to think they can be invincible from this point forward, and to end up really disappointed and pissed off at themselves when they fail later on, because hey, those guys in Kutless can make vows like that and keep them (at least, as far as the song seems to indicate), so what, am I just a screw-up who was never really serious about this Christian thing?

I have never liked the word "Vow" because of what the Scripture Danny316 mentioned and many more. And, I've never liked the phrase "I'll never think twice"; though it would be great to never think twice, but there are "fiery darts" and of course you're going to think twice about some things whether it's some temptation or you're loyalty and obedience to God, etc.... I think when people hear this song, they should listen to "Treason" also. They always remind me of each other when I listen to either one. They should have written it differently; I wish the word "vow" was never in the song. I've been really studying this song lately, and all of the wrong wording doesn't actually mean much to me personally (or course I it means something to me when I think about how others may interpret it and where that may lead them). I agree with pretty much all of what you guys have said about how it makes you feel condemned when you make all of these promises you know you'll eventually break at some time, and how we also aren't suppose to plan on failing, and how we are called to be perfect and live worthy in the eyes of God; and this can only be done in Christ and His grace and power working in us, that's why we need Him. We are called to "strive to live worthy of the calling with which we were called", I don't think we should make vows about it, but to definetely having a heart that chases after God in the aspects reflected in the song, about loving and honoring God, and giving Him all of you and letting Him be all in your life......now the never thinking twice part won't usually be true, but inspite of that, we should always seek to do all He has for us. And, most of the song talks about this vow, that is impossible to keep apart from His grace, and I don't think the song says you'll always be able to keep it, the second verse says, "Lord I'll do my best to do all that I say. I'm not perfect but I know it's okay. (which is not okay, but that's why Christ died, so it can be okay, if we "repent and turn" to Him as the song says) If I stumble You won't condemn my shame....." I think the vow is actually broken in that second verse. And then, the just end up making it again after that. What I really think this song indicates, is dedicating your life to God wholeheartedly, and rededicating it. I see songs differently, and this has been one that has been on my mind a lot in many different ways of it's interpretation. Just talking about this song makes me want to listen to it. The main thing that's wrong with the song, is the whole 'I promise' theme, it would have been written better in a question format, "Do I love You?" "How and will I honor You?" "Have I given You everything?" "Are You all in my life?" "Will I do what You have for me?" and the list goes on..... that is what I hear when I listen to the song and that and the rest of the song together (shall I explain the rest?) is what really gets me, and it is awesome when you listen to it from that perspective.

No one type is the best; I'm just tired of the most straightforward types of art always being dominant while the rest are disrespected and looked down on for being less useful.

I know its sad when that happens; but the art is what it's perceived as to each of the viewers.

I usually make one up on purpose when I do it, and put it in quotes to indicate that I'm aware it's not really a word.

Yeah, it's really fun to make them up, but unfortunetly that was my sheer thoughtlessness at the time.

And yet you've settled for a band that does neither particularly well.

I haven't really settled, sure they're my favorite right now, but that's because they have at least a sufficient amount of things I like in each of their songs.

No. There's certainly a lot more that I could stand to know about the immense details contained within the Bible. I'm just a person who is interested in investigating whether the music that Christians make really reflect the things that we say we believe about God, or whether, due to a lack of skill or insight, they insinuate false things about God to people who might not know any better.

Interesting.

I skipped part of your post, because you've got a pretty meaty list of dislikes about music that I will have to address later.

Meaty in a good way or a bad way or both and why?

[NewDimension]

Nope.

Why not?

[Ian]

Because talking about God sells him short due to the limitations of our language and our overall ability to comprehend.

Not saying you should choose not to talk about him, just that I personally generally choose not to unless there's some blatant reason I should.

But that's taking this topic off course.

[dgp11776]

Well I hope you don't pray, then.  I'm not too sure God wants you talking to Him if you don't want to talk about Him.

[Ian]

First off, I'll gladly talk about him if the time is right.  I just don't like making a fool of myself by blathering on about it all the time and making God sound like less than he deserves to be understood as.

Secondly, I'm not sure what praying has to do with it; prayer is just you and God spending quiet time together.  Talking about God to other people is a completely different matter, especially to non-believers.  It's trying to explain something that can't be explained.  Like trying to explain to someone your love for your wife, or your kids (neither of which I have, so perhaps this isn't the best example, I don't know).  Can't be done properly.  Sure, some guys will go on and on about their wife anyways, but all it does is make them look crazy.  Which is fine in that particular case, because you're not really trying to draw someone towards your wife, you're just expressing your joy, which is great.  In the case of God, you're trying to draw people to him, and nothing you can say really works.  Expressing your joy of God is great, but it doesn't do anything on other people.  And since I don't like expressing myself vocally in any situation (don't worry, I do other things), that's why I personally generally don't talk about him terribly much.

Third, the suggestion that God doesn't want me talking to him because of something I've done or an attitude I have is absolutely rediculous, and is frankly pretty disturbing.

[murlough23]

So how far north are these people who aren't wusses in 60-degree weather?

It's not like there's a boundary line or anything. I just know that folks in the Greater Los Angeles area (and I'd assume San Diego as well) are more likely to be wimps about temperatures below 60.

Oh, goodie! Let's not forget to think analytical now....

Is that a clue?

I've been in 115 temps, unfortunetly I"ve never been in anything below 10 degrees though, at least not that I know of.

You must live in the desert. But far enough from L.A. that taking a trip here isn't really feasible; otherwise I'd assume you'd have done so already.

Maybe southern Utah?

It's not like I claim to notice it all the time.

Over time you'll probably start noticing it more.

I don't know if that's true; I mean, it could be, but I just don't know about it. I think it depends on the location also. Last year where I live, it was a fairly cooler summer, still hot, just not as hot as it usually gets as many days. However, I think this year it will be pretty hot. I don't know for sure if global warming it a hypothesis or reality; there's too much speculation.

This is becoming a helluva tangent, but I would say that (a) small fluctuations back and forth from year to year don't mean there isn't an overall trend, since something like this would happen on a much more long-term scale, and (b) even if global warming isn't happening, it can't hurt us to take at least some small steps to prevent it from happening. I certainly think it's possible.

There are different meanings to the "rain" metaphors.

Sure, but don't use both in the same song while not even acknowledging the irony of the double meaning. Otherwise it looks like you just weren't paying attention.

One song, that bugs me about the "sun" metaphor, is the one from Barlowgirl called "I Believe In Love". It says "I believe in the sun, even when it's not shining". That part of the song just throws it off for me, because I know that's how it "feels" like it is sometimes, but the sun never actually stops shining; it's the dark clouds that prevent our eyes from seeing it at the time.

Or when you're on the dark side of the planet! Yeah, that's a really botched metaphor, that could easily be fixed by saying "Even when I don't see it shining." (It still wouldn't be terribly original, but at least it'd be accurate.)

I've also lived in a valley my whole life, but neither of those. When you venture to higher elevations, and you look down on the valley, and you see what you're actually breathing, you think, "Wow, I breathe that everyday," unless of course it rains or there's a good wind or something.....

Now I want to say central California (like Fresno or Bakersfield), but that's too close to L.A. to have never been here.

I look at the songs from a different perspective when I listen to them on my own, and I'm not trying to listen from someone else's perspective who may be a non-Christian or someone weak in their faith.

So it makes it OK that it'll throw someone else off, as long as you get it? The more fans keep listening and show them support, the bigger platform they'll have to throw people of who don't understand the Christian faith well enough to make allowances for their botched lyrics the way you do.

Songs can be harmful in one retrospect, and helpful in another.

I think you mean "respect" instead of "retrospect". In any event, I care more about the harm than the help here.

I like his songwriting also, and I don't own any of his cd's either. I think one reason we don't own his cd's is because we hear his songs so much already.

Yeah, it just dawned on me that this might be part of my reasoning as well. I've heard those songs manipulated and rearranged and sung with choirs and whatnot, so to go back to Redman's fairly basic pop/rock arrangements can be a bit of a disappointment at times, but I still have to give him credit for the writing and the composition.

Different types of discernment.

What would the difference be, aside from the thing being discerned?

It is a lame excuse, but it's an honest one. I never had the internet until recently, so of course the radio, television, and stuff you hear at churches is all that's going to mainly consist of what I've actually heard previously.

I suppose not having the Internet would give one limited access at best. That's a factor I hadn't taken into account; I just take it for granted that pretty much everyone has the Internet, which is probably rather presumptive of me.

I find it sad, though, that without the Internet, you are pretty much subjected to whatever's chosen for you on the airwaves. There's still word of mouth among your community of friends, but given that most Christians will apparently chose whatever's in front of them and easiest to find so long as it's labeled "Christian" (either that or they'll just ignore Christian music altogether - I've spent time in both camps), your circle of friends probably isn't going to be too helpful there, unless you're lucky enough to know someone with eclectic tastes.

That's just it, there's too much music that has too many errors you can find in some way in it. I hate that.

It's all made by humans; I'm willing to be reasonable and expect that everybody makes mistakes. But at the same time, some people get really good at being aware of the pitfalls and avoiding them most of the time, and I want those artists to be recognized for their excellence, which can't really be done if (a) nobody's heard of them and (b) mediocre music is getting tons of accolades, thus making it not even show up on the radar any more when something genuinely good gets recognized.

So how often is too often to eat something that can be good but also can have some perservatives in it?

I'm not sure. But I'm pretty sure that it shouldn't be a staple of your diet.

"Generally" is the accurate word. I don't listen to it on general terms. It's just like if you're eating a pizza and there's something you don't like on it or if it tastes like chemicals or something, you pick that piece off and throw it away. Not to say that the taste won't ever get in your mouth, but you won't digested it. The pizza still can be good. And yes, we know most pizza isn't that healthy.....you get the allegory.

Yes, but you've got so much sentimental attachment here that you can't spit it out and throw it away, so I'm not sure what to do.

I've heard some really good interviews from them. It probably is a bi of both.

I'd love a link to an example.

I have never liked the word "Vow" because of what the Scripture Danny316 mentioned and many more. And, I've never liked the phrase "I'll never think twice"; though it would be great to never think twice, but there are "fiery darts" and of course you're going to think twice about some things whether it's some temptation or you're loyalty and obedience to God, etc....

Why even bring up the song, then, if it's not a particularly good example?

I think when people hear this song, they should listen to "Treason" also. They always remind me of each other when I listen to either one.

I like "Treason". There's still some lyrical awkwardness there (plus a stolen guitar riff), but I can get behind what they're saying.

And, most of the song talks about this vow, that is impossible to keep apart from His grace, and I don't think the song says you'll always be able to keep it, the second verse says, "Lord I'll do my best to do all that I say. I'm not perfect but I know it's okay. (which is not okay, but that's why Christ died, so it can be okay, if we "repent and turn" to Him as the song says) If I stumble You won't condemn my shame....." I think the vow is actually broken in that second verse. And then, the just end up making it again after that.

Which is pretty stupid; you might want to phrase your vow a little differently the second time around. Even if the second verse "fixes" the overly simplified understanding of things that came before it, they're still gonna go back and repeat the same chorus, so I don't feel like much is being learned.

Have you seen Bee Movie? There's a scene in which the bee flies into a window, and blurts out, "Ow!", and then says to himself, "Maybe this time", and then flies into it again. "Maybe this time!" Smack. "This time!" Smack. "Thistimethistimethistimethistime!!!!!" That's what the song reminds me of.

What I really think this song indicates, is dedicating your life to God wholeheartedly, and rededicating it. I see songs differently, and this has been one that has been on my mind a lot in many different ways of it's interpretation. Just talking about this song makes me want to listen to it. The main thing that's wrong with the song, is the whole 'I promise' theme, it would have been written better in a question format, "Do I love You?" "How and will I honor You?" "Have I given You everything?" "Are You all in my life?" "Will I do what You have for me?" and the list goes on..... that is what I hear when I listen to the song and that and the rest of the song together (shall I explain the rest?) is what really gets me, and it is awesome when you listen to it from that perspective.

They wrote a song about something awesome. That doesn't make the song awesome. Once again, you can make all of those connections in your mind to things you've learned about God's grace and convictions you have to give yourself to Him wholeheartedly. And those same ideas may have been in the heads of the people who wrote this song. But the song totally fails to communicate those ideas well. You have to read a lot more into it than what is actually said to really get that "awesome" response to it.

I know its sad when that happens; but the art is what it's perceived as to each of the viewers.

The viewers aren't terribly perceptive in this case. They don't really want to perceive all that much. They just want to see something that immediately makes sense to them.

I haven't really settled, sure they're my favorite right now, but that's because they have at least a sufficient amount of things I like in each of their songs.

"Sufficient" isn't much of a passionate description for something that's supposed to be your favorite. We need to help you find a new favorite, stat.

Meaty in a good way or a bad way or both and why?

Oh, it was just long, and I was running out of time. Not a bad thing; I was glad that you went into details, but I needed to get back to work.

[NewDimension]

It's not like there's a boundary line or anything. I just know that folks in the Greater Los Angeles area (and I'd assume San Diego as well) are more likely to be wimps about temperatures below 60.

Okay, if there's no boundary line or anything, do you know of any communities where people don't trip out when it's 60 degrees?

Is that a clue?

If you want it to be one.

You must live in the desert. But far enough from L.A. that taking a trip here isn't really feasible; otherwise I'd assume you'd have done so already.

Maybe southern Utah?

I don't live in a desert, I have been to places that seem like deserts, and I don't live in southern Utah.

Over time you'll probably start noticing it more.

Really?

This is becoming a helluva tangent, but I would say that (a) small fluctuations back and forth from year to year don't mean there isn't an overall trend, since something like this would happen on a much more long-term scale, and (b) even if global warming isn't happening, it can't hurt us to take at least some small steps to prevent it from happening. I certainly think it's possible.

Global warming is a possibility, and it is good to use preventive cautions. Whether its happening for sure or not, I'm not going to pretend like I know.

Sure, but don't use both in the same song while not even acknowledging the irony of the double meaning. Otherwise it looks like you just weren't paying attention.

Exactly.

Or when you're on the dark side of the planet! Yeah, that's a really botched metaphor, that could easily be fixed by saying "Even when I don't see it shining." (It still wouldn't be terribly original, but at least it'd be accurate.)

I never thought about the dark side of the planet, but even in that, the sun is still shining; it's just the earth (you're visual platform) is turned away from the sun at that time. This is reminding me of other errors in other songs.

Now I want to say central California (like Fresno or Bakersfield), but that's too close to L.A. to have never been here.

I don't live in central California; not Fresno or Bakersfield. I imagine, there's a list of valley's that are in the Pacific Time zone; of which I live in one. 

So it makes it OK that it'll throw someone else off, as long as you get it? The more fans keep listening and show them support, the bigger platform they'll have to throw people of who don't understand the Christian faith well enough to make allowances for their botched lyrics the way you do.

No, it doesn't make it okay; at the same time, it's not like you're just going to throw something away that helps you specifically. The only reason I think people support them as much as they do, is because they perceive the lyrics in their songs as helpful and encouraging. Their songs, and songs from others bands/artists can be extremely helpful to some people and extremely misleading and harmful to another. We don't know how everyone individually views their songs, whether they are Christians or non-Christians, it largely depends on the person. That's why they should have wrote some of their songs differently. We don't know how they've written the new album yet.

I think you mean "respect" instead of "retrospect". In any event, I care more about the harm than the help here.

I think I mean, "perspective." We shouldn't just look at something from one perspective, we should look at it from as many perspectives as we can. I care about both; even if there's nothing particularly harmful in a song, is there anything helpful?

Yeah, it just dawned on me that this might be part of my reasoning as well. I've heard those songs manipulated and rearranged and sung with choirs and whatnot, so to go back to Redman's fairly basic pop/rock arrangements can be a bit of a disappointment at times, but I still have to give him credit for the writing and the composition.

It can be a disappointment; but as you said, the songwriting is still good.

What would the difference be, aside from the thing being discerned?

That's what I mean. You can discern different things about something.

I find it sad, though, that without the Internet, you are pretty much subjected to whatever's chosen for you on the airwaves. There's still word of mouth among your community of friends, but given that most Christians will apparently chose whatever's in front of them and easiest to find so long as it's labeled "Christian" (either that or they'll just ignore Christian music altogether - I've spent time in both camps), your circle of friends probably isn't going to be too helpful there, unless you're lucky enough to know someone with eclectic tastes.

It is sad. I'm usually the person who's into music the most, and at the same time, I haven't been listening to is as much as I use to lately.

It's all made by humans; I'm willing to be reasonable and expect that everybody makes mistakes. But at the same time, some people get really good at being aware of the pitfalls and avoiding them most of the time, and I want those artists to be recognized for their excellence, which can't really be done if (a) nobody's heard of them and (b) mediocre music is getting tons of accolades, thus making it not even show up on the radar any more when something genuinely good gets recognized.

I wonder how many there are so far that have become good at being aware of and avoiding pitfalls and things that can cause potential harm.

I'm not sure. But I'm pretty sure that it shouldn't be a staple of your diet.

There really wouldn't be much left.

Yes, but you've got so much sentimental attachment here that you can't spit it out and throw it away, so I'm not sure what to do.

What's that suppose to mean?

I'd love a link to an example.

There aren't that many examples, because there aren't that many actual recorded or written interviews, of them being interviewed by somebody. I wish there were more. Do you want like a video clip of one of them talking about something, is that what you mean? Or like an article interview or somthing? What do you want to hear them talking about?

Why even bring up the song, then, if it's not a particularly good example?

For several reasons. To see if I'm missing that perspective and to see if you're limiting you're perspective reveresly or whether God just reveals things to me in their music, or maybe both.

I like "Treason". There's still some lyrical awkwardness there (plus a stolen guitar riff), but I can get behind what they're saying.

What's the lyrical awkwardness you're implying in that song?

Which is pretty stupid; you might want to phrase your vow a little differently the second time around. Even if the second verse "fixes" the overly simplified understanding of things that came before it, they're still gonna go back and repeat the same chorus, so I don't feel like much is being learned.

Have you seen Bee Movie? There's a scene in which the bee flies into a window, and blurts out, "Ow!", and then says to himself, "Maybe this time", and then flies into it again. "Maybe this time!" Smack. "This time!" Smack. "Thistimethistimethistimethistime!!!!!" That's what the song reminds me of.

In saying this, you're reminding me of two things. The first being the song "This Time" (you haven't forgotten that one have you?)    The second thing being, "For a righteous man may fall seven times and rise again..."

They wrote a song about something awesome. That doesn't make the song awesome. Once again, you can make all of those connections in your mind to things you've learned about God's grace and convictions you have to give yourself to Him wholeheartedly. And those same ideas may have been in the heads of the people who wrote this song. But the song totally fails to communicate those ideas well. You have to read a lot more into it than what is actually said to really get that "awesome" response to it.

They should have written it differently, I said. To me, no song in itsself is awesome either way. The writer can attribute to how awesome it is in perfecting how the things are worded.   

The viewers aren't terribly perceptive in this case. They don't really want to perceive all that much. They just want to see something that immediately makes sense to them.

They are who they are; some will change their perspective, some won't.

"Sufficient" isn't much of a passionate description for something that's supposed to be your favorite. We need to help you find a new favorite, stat.

I said " at least a sufficient amount of things I like..." I should have paraphrased it differently. What I ment was, most bands/artists, don't  contain a sufficient amount of things I like in much of their music, and Kutless does in every song of their's with me, which is one of the major reasons why they are my favorite band.

[NewDimension]

First off, I'll gladly talk about him if the time is right.  I just don't like making a fool of myself by blathering on about it all the time and making God sound like less than he deserves to be understood as.

 And since I don't like expressing myself vocally in any situation (don't worry, I do other things), that's why I personally generally don't talk about him terribly much.

Okay, so how do you when it's the right time? What are these other things you speak of?

[Ian]

Don't really feel the need to let this rabbit trail continue any further.

[NewDimension]

Well I'd love to know what the rest of the rabbit trail is; everyone wants to know your specific answers to the few questions, so please answer them for us. 

[murlough23]

Well I'd love to know what the rest of the rabbit trail is; everyone wants to know your specific answers to the few questions, so please answer them for us. 

Every specific answer you ask for is then followed up with another question and another and another and another, and I know you're just curious, but it does get a bit time-consuming and feel like the whole thing will never come to an understanding.

[NewDimension]

I asked Ian different questions; I will respond to those answers differently. I only asked Ian like three questions. Three isn't that time-consuming.

[bloop]

When the questions only bifurcate from there, it can become a whole lot of questions very quickly.

[NewDimension]

It can become a whole lot of questions, but it doesn't have to and I'm not planning to ask anymore questions. It's good to ask questions if you ever want to find out any answers. Sorry guys, but I'm just obssessed with different perspectives and learning things and stuff right now. If you guys don't want to give me answers don't, I'll find them someplace else.

[Ian]

Alright, I'll answer your questions and we'll see what happens.

Okay, so how do you when it's the right time?

When my audience wants to hear it, not when I think they should want to hear it.

What are these other things you speak of?

Music and art, both of which are infinitely more communicative on emotional levels than speech.

[murlough23]

It can become a whole lot of questions, but it doesn't have to and I'm not planning to ask anymore questions. It's good to ask questions if you ever want to find out any answers. Sorry guys, but I'm just obssessed with different perspectives and learning things and stuff right now. If you guys don't want to give me answers don't, I'll find them someplace else.

There's nothing wrong with asking questions, just be mindful that (a) the rate at which you ask them makes it difficult to keep up, and (b) you do have an annoying habit of asking about stuff that I feel I've already answered sufficiently.

[NewDimension]

Alright, I'll answer your questions and we'll see what happens.
When my audience wants to hear it, not when I think they should want to hear it.
Music and art, both of which are infinitely more communicative on emotional levels than speech.

Nice answers; I could ask another question but I won't.

[Ian]

Bravo, bravo.  Encore.

[NewDimension]

Bravo, bravo.  Encore.

We don't have a time machine.

[Ian]

The future is at your fingertips, young one.  Always remember that.

[NewDimension]

The future is at your fingertips, young one.  Always remember that.

Congradulations, you just reminded me of another Kutless song: "You have the power you need, to change your legacy".....

[Ian]

*Congratulations

[NewDimension]

Wow, this is interesting.