MENU

Culture
Category

On April 9, 2014 By In Culture

Obedience is the Door to Joy

Reformation begins with a Spirit-given desire to submit fully and completely to the Scriptures. It does not matter whether this reformation begins in the home or the church or in the community. Sitting humbly under the Word is an essential ingredient.

In my home one of the ways I have worked towards reformation is by getting my children to obey me. This is not easy in our culture where both authority and submission are despised. By getting my children to obey, I am learning to obey. But as with any good thing there are dangers. One of the great dangers of teaching my children to obey is to view their obedience as the goal instead of the means to a greater goal. The Westminster Shorter Catechism very succinctly names the goal we should have in life:

Question: What is the chief end of man?

Answer: The chief  end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.

In another delightful phrase that I, unfortunately, just found, The Belgic Confession says that God is the “overflowing fountain of all good.” (Article I) The goal is enjoying God, not obeying him. Now, you cannot have joy without obedience. But it is possible to have a type of obedience that does not lead to joy. It is possible to teach our children to obey without ever leading them through the door to joy.

Do we teach them to obey so they might enjoy the goodness of God? Do we view obedience as a door to a mansion where all the rooms are filled with the wonders of God or do we view it as the last stop on the train? Is teaching our children to obey a way setting them free or a way controlling them? Let me use the dinner table and bedtime as examples of what I mean.

At our table we have rules. These are not written in the Bible, but they are “house rules” that my wife and I have set up for our table. If I was going to use a Bible verse to justify these rules it would be Ephesians 4:32, “Be kind to one another.” Manners at the table are a way of being kind. Some of these rules are: wait until mom and sisters are seated before the men sit, chew quietly, do not interrupt, do not eat with your fingers (with exceptions for pizza, fried chicken, and PB&J), etc. The point of having and enforcing these rules is not just to keep our children under control. These rules make our table a place of joy. (Needless to say it does not always work out this way.) We sing at the table. We tell jokes and puns. We tell stories. We listen to stories, even from the littlest ones. We ask questions. We discuss world events and events in our homes. We learn what our children are thinking and what they care about. None of this is possible without obedience. But obedience is not the goal. The goal is joy around the table.

Bedtime is the same way. I do not make my children obey at bedtime so I can simply say, “Bedtime” and they all snap to it. I teach  my children to obey at bedtime so we can pray together, talk a bit, maybe sing. In other words I teach them to obey so we can end the day enjoying God and each other.

The goal in all of life is to find great joy in God, his people, and his world. Obedience is a door to this goal, but it is not the goal itself. To stop and sit in the door of a great house would be an insult to the master of the house.

Here are three questions to consider:

First, are you teaching your children to obey? Do you know that by allowing them to disobey you are keeping them from enjoying God and this world? Disobedience brings bondage.

Second, you parents who are trying to get your children to obey are you leading your children to joy through obedience or are you sitting in the door examining the hinges? Is your house filled with joyless obedience? If you have obedient children, but no joy then neither you nor your children are being obedient, no matter how well they listen.

Third, parents how do you view your own obedience? Do you view obedience as a means to enjoying God? Or do you view obedience as the end, the goal itself?

This was originally posted at Singing and Slaying.<>cifrolom.comнадежная раскрутка а

Read more

On April 4, 2014 By In Culture

Why enjoy this music? – What is in progressive rock for the mature believer

I grew up in a home where my parents took both my brother and me to church almost every Sunday. The memories I have are of a conservative Bible Church full of good people who loved the Lord and sought to glorify God in word and in deed. My teenage years directly coincided with the explosive growth of contemporary Christian music (CCM). All of the cool kids in our youth group owned cassettes by artists such as Petra, Michael W. Smith, Amy Grant, and Whiteheart. A smaller subset of ultra-cool youth group kids owned cassettes by Steve Taylor and Stryper.

Then there were the square peg/round hole kids like myself who, although they enjoyed and owned some contemporary Christian music, also really enjoyed so-called “secular music” by artists such as Genesis, Rush, Van Halen, and Journey. This was a problem. My church youth group promoted the ministries of people like Bob Larson and Al Menconi (remember them?) who proclaimed that “secular rock & roll” was “the devil’s diversion” and that what was needed was a 30 day “Christian music diet” in order to flush out the bad stuff.[1] Much of this gained little traction with me, even when it was accompanied by a late-night showing of A Thief in the Night at a youth group all-nighter. For the most part I continued to enjoy Judas Priest and Bryan Adams right alongside Rich Mullins and DeGarmo and Key

Fast-forward to 2014. Many Christians freely interact with all sorts of “non-Christian movies,” especially in critiquing a movie’s story and worldview. Students attending Christian academies (especially classical Christian academies) participate in “great books” or Omnibus programs where they are expected to read The Koran, On the Origin of Species, or Mein Kampf alongside City of God, Institutes of the Christian Religion, and Mere Christianity. In the areas of movies and literature Christians are learning more and more to understand the culture and how to bring the Christian worldview to bear in the arena of ideas. We have learned (rightly, I believe) that sifting through a thing thoughtfully in order to keep the wheat and reject the tares pleases God much more than a wholesale, retreatist rejection of the whole shooting match. Realizing that unbelievers are able to tell a story that correctly reflects God’s truth, beauty, and goodness is to realize that God pours out his common grace on believers and unbelievers alike, even if unbelievers remain strangers to God’s redeeming grace.

And yet I fear that, in the area of music, too many thoughtful Christians are stuck in a reactionary Christian ghetto with no desire to strike out and explore other musical aspects of God’s world. A wise partaking of and engagement in rock music–especially progressive rock music–is what I am after in this series of posts. If Christians are mature enough to interact thoughtfully and honestly with Immanuel Kant, Edgar Allen Poe, and The Communist Manifesto then they should be able to interact thoughtfully and honestly with Pink Floyd, Marillion, and the song “BU2B” by the band Rush.

One reading of pop music history claims that punk rock came along in the late 1970s and almost overnight rendered progressive rock obsolete “dinosaur music.” Punk rockers may or may not have “hated” prog rock, but I believe we can say beyond a reasonable doubt that punk rock gloried in the overthrow of tradition, adhered to the ethos of ugly anarchy, and believed in the supremacy of revolution. How else can one explain explain a song that exclaimed, “I am an anti-christ/I am an anarchist/Don’t know what I want but I know how to get it/I wanna destroy the passer by.” If the punkers rejected the proggers because the latter loved truth, beauty, and goodness while the former did not, then so be it.

But I expect better things of Christians, especially Christians that regularly partake in great books, big ideas, and meta-narratives. J. S. Bach’s B Minor Mass is beauty nonpareil, but Yes’s piece “Awaken” is also quite glorious in its way. Handel’s Messiah is a soul-stirring (albeit slightly over-performed) masterwork, but the song “The Underfall Yard” by Big Big Train also excels by celebrating creation–with an undercurrent of Ecclesiastes “all is vapor” melancholy–in ways that are deeply rousing, incarnational, and dare I say it, Christian.

So why partake of progressive rock? Because it is there, because it frequently tells amazing stories with a distinctly Christian worldview (sometimes even intentionally), and because Christians can and should affirm truth, beauty, and goodness wherever they find it.

It is time for mature, thoughtful Christians to expand their music horizons beyond J. S. Bach, Handel’s Messiah, great hymns of the faith played on the pan flute, and the Gaither Homecoming videos.  My hope is that the rest of this series will help you expand those horizons by exploring the glorious mess that is progressive rock music.

1. Never mind that, in retrospect, much of the “Christian music” meant to flush out the bad stuff was, in the words of C. S. Lewis, “fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music.”

—

Derek Hale has lived all of his life in Wichita, Kansas and isn’t a bit ashamed about that fact. He and his wife Nicole have only six children–four daughters and two young sons of thunder. Derek is a ruling elder, chief musician, and performs pastoral duties at Trinity Covenant Church (CREC). Derek manages a firmware lab for NetApp and enjoys reading, computers, exercising, craft beer, and playing and listening to music. But not all at the same time. He blogs occasionally at youdidntblogthat.tumblr.com.<>сколько стоит реклама в гугл адвордс

Read more

On April 4, 2014 By In Culture

My Dad in the Mirror

by Marc Hays

20140404-101508.jpgAbout five years ago, I was 35, which is the age my dad was when I was 6. When I was a kid, my dad would take pity on me during the lengthier sermons at church to entertain me. He would tuck his thumb inside his fingers and allow me to attempt to pry his fingers open, thereby freeing his thumb from its bonds. It seems like that could become a raucous game during the sermon, but I guess I knew better, because it never got out of hand. Speaking of out of hand, that was the goal, but I was never able to free his thumb out of hand either. What I did do was spend hours looking at his hand–memorizing his hand. Around the time I turned 35, I looked down and saw my father’s hands attached to the ends of my arms. It was both pleasant and startling. I was pleased because I love my dad and hope that I am becoming like him in more ways than just physically. It was startling because when I was six I thought my dad was pretty old, and there I was with hands showing the signs of 35 years of use.

This morning as I was leaving for work, I stopped in front of the mirror to see if any hairs on my head were sticking up in embarrassing directions, and I used my hands to resituate my hair into a somewhat presentable arrangement. As I wiped down the cowlicks, there stood my dad in the mirror, reorganizing his mop on top before he rushed off to work. It was just plain freaky. Added to the motions of my hands and arms resembling my dad, I realized that my hair lies on my head just as his hair lies on his head. Once again, I’m not complaining, just realizing that as I age I become more and more like him.

This Sunday, I will be ordained a ruling elder at St. Mark Reformed Church in Brentwood, Tennessee. My dad is the pastor of St. Peter Presbyterian in Mendota, Virginia. He is driving in this weekend to lay hands on me as I once again become more like him, as he once again participates in reshaping me into a new man.

For forty years now, my Heavenly Father has been using my earthly father to make me the man that I’ve become. From my father’s genes that make my hands look like his and my cowlick pop up in the same place, to the habits that he’s both intentionally and inadvertently instilled in me over the decades, I am becoming more and more like him.

All this to say, “Thank you, Father,” and to say, “Thank you, father.” I know I am not here by any leverage I have over my own bootstraps. I have been blessed in time and in space by God’s gracious purposes and providences, manifest through the man on whose shoulders I still stand. I am dwelling in houses I did not build and drinking from cisterns that I didn’t dig. May God’s gracious covenant succeed through me to the next generation as it did from my father’s to me that the earth may be covered with Jesus’ glory as the waters cover the sea.<>производство рекламных конструкцийпродвижение а в интернете стоимость

Read more

On April 2, 2014 By In Culture

What do you mean by this music? – Moving toward a definition of progressive rock

A week ago I offered the opening salvo in what I hope will be a series of posts extolling the pursuit of truth, beauty, and goodness through progressive rock music. Last week’s post mentioned briefly the difficulty in coming up with anything approaching an “all-inclusive definition” of what is or is not progressive rock. The problem is that musical genres are often imposed by music fans or record label marketing departments. Most musicians refuse to think in terms of genres and are often surprised after the fact that their latest album is “the best New Age album ever” or “a definitive work of prog rock yumminess.” Therefore, one set of fans believes it is self-evident that their favorite group is the very epitome of neo-thrash-punk-ska-disco icon while another set vehemently disagrees and swears that the same artist is the best proto-rockabilly-emo-folk band on planet Earth. Each group of fans digs in their heels, the Internet message boards generate more heat than light, and the whole thing ends up degenerating into name calling and hurt feelings.

Several book-length studies have been written on the topic of progressive rock [1] and those books all deal at some point with the volatile topic of defining the boundaries of the genre. I have perused all of the books listed below and wish to offer Edward Macan’s broad outline in his book Rocking the Classics: English Progressive Rock and the Counterculture as the most helpful for our purposes here. Macan moves toward a broad definition of the genre by looking at prog’s musical style, its visual style, and its lyrical style. Along the way he breaks things up thusly [2]:

Musical style

  • Instrumentation and tone color – In progressive rock the standard rock band configuration of one or two guitars, a bass guitar, a keyboard/piano, and a drum kit was augmented to include all sorts of non-traditional rock music instruments such as the flute, violin, oboe, harp, church organ, 12-string acoustic guitar, and various percussion instruments. In addition, prog keyboardists such as Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, and Tony Banks were early-adopters of rapidly developing synthesizer technology.

  • Classical forms – Many British rock groups such as The Rolling Stones, Cream, The Yardbirds, and Led Zeppelin relied heavily on the language of the American blues to shape their sound. Many early prog artists (especially those from Britain) either downplayed or ignored altogether urban American blues influences in favor of the more sophisticated musical devices (i.e. suites, fugue/counterpoint, statement/development/recapitulation, and odd time signatures such as 7/4, 9/8, and 11/16). Prog musicians also preferred the longer, broader sweep of European classical music, largely rejecting the concept of the “three-and-a-half minute pop song.”

  • Virtuosity – Since much early prog either downplayed or rejected blues-based musical forms–including jazz–the virtuosity demonstrated by prog musicians had less to do with a jazz-based language and more to do with the classical music-based idea of virtuosity best exemplified by violinist Niccolò Paganini or pianist Franz Liszt.

  • Modal harmony – Prog musicians made use of the seven modern modes [3] or other exotic scales (and their corresponding chords) in order to achieve a specific musical mood. Classical composers such as Richard Wagner, Béla Bartók, Igor Stravinsky, Sergei Prokofiev, and Olivier Messiaen popularized the use of these modes and scales in classical music.

Visual style

  • Album cover art – Prog rock developed in the age of the long-playing phonograph record. Many prog rock artists saw album covers as another way to create a mood or (using today’s marketing jargon) “brand themselves” through the use of recurring visual themes, fonts, and iconography on album covers. Prog bands also made use of gatefold sleeve technology in order to expand further the visuals attached to the enjoyment of their music. The full enjoyment of prog rock music involved not just listening to the music but also receiving a satisfying visual experience, as well.

  • The concert experience – A progressive rock concert experience often became an extension of the artwork created for the album cover as prog rockers sought to implement parts of the album artwork into their stage show in the form of backdrops, logos, costumes, bass drum heads, etc.

Lyrical style

  • Surrealism – Influenced by authors such as T. S. Eliot and Hermann Hesse, prog rock lyricists sought to create lyrics that were vague, sarcastic, ironic, obscure, or that could be understood in more than one way. Many prog rock lyrics featured a distinctively British, Monty Python-esque whimsy.

  • Countercultural idealism – Several prog rock lyricists utilized the hippy idealism of the late-1960s to confront and deconstruct the social issues of the day.

  • Resistance and protest – Influenced by the folk protest songs of the 60s (as well as the works of Eliot and Hesse), many prog rock lyricists offered scathing critiques of Western consumerism, imperialism, the growing threat of technology, and Randolph Bourne’s concept of “war as the health of the state.”

  • Utopian vision (mythology, mysticism, sci-fi themes) – Prog rock lyricists often drew upon literary sources as diverse as J. R. R. Tolkien (especially his Middle Earth cycle), Eastern spiritual writings such as the Shastric scriptures, and the science fiction writing of authors like Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov to construct an agrarian, vaguely spiritual world that was at once suspicious of technology yet nevertheless intrigued by space exploration and time travel.

In sum, I wish to posit that progressive rock is a style of music based upon the instrumentation of blues-based rock music, yet with the blues elements stripped away in favor of elements found more commonly in classical music. Improvisation takes place, but in manner that is more tightly controlled than in jazz. The common rock instrumentation is augmented with instruments not traditionally found in a rock setting. Progressive rock is concerned with creating a distinctive visual experience through the use of striking album cover artwork that often is transferred over to the concert stage. Finally, the lyrics of progressive rock are frequently topical, spiritual, or narrative in nature. The prog rock lyricist unfolds their ideas–often over the span of 15 to 20 minutes–through the use of literary devices such as sarcasm, whimsy, irony, and obscurantism.

Although this might seem like an exhaustive amount of detail about a musical genre, this barely scratches the surface of what could be said about progressive rock. There is a whole world of prog sub-genres that further muddies the waters over what properly constitutes prog. It isn’t enough to establish that a musical artist is or isn’t prog in the first place. The argument then proceeds as to whether said artist is “Canterbury,” “symphonic prog,” “neo-progressive,” or some other microbrew sub-genre.

I also realize that this post has been rather thin in biblical content. In my next post I will attempt to atone for these transgressions by delving briefly (emphasis on briefly) into a few reasons why a Christian should care at all about this music and hopefully provide some ground rules for the faithful enjoyment of progressive rock.

I will let former Yes and King Crimson drummer Bill Bruford have the last word on defining progressive rock. In his uniquely British way, Bruford succinctly summarizes the type of person(s) responsible for the engineering the first wave of prog rock greatness.

The release of King Crimson’s album In the Court of the Crimson King in 1969 signalled [sic] the emergence of the mature progressive rock style that reached its commercial and artistic zenith between 1970 and 1975 in the music of such bands as Jethro Tull, Yes, Genesis, ELP, Gentle Giant, Van der Graaf Generator, and Curved Air.

Demographically, progressive rock was a music from south-east England, overwhelmingly made by nice middle-class English boys like me. The musicians’ backgrounds were strictly white-collar, and their parents were often downright distinguished. Never working-class, it was rather the vital expression of a bohemian, middle-class intelligentsia. [4]

1. Among the best are Hegarty, Paul, and Martin Halliwell. Beyond and Before: Progressive Rock since the 1960s. New York: Continuum, 2011. Lambe, Stephen. Citizens of Hope and Glory: The Story of Progressive Rock. Stroud: Amberley, 2011. Macan, Edward. Rocking the Classics: English Progressive Rock and the Counterculture. New York: Oxford UP, 1997. Martin, Bill. Listening to the Future: The Time of Progressive Rock, 1968-1978. Chicago, IL: Open Court, 1998. Romano, Will. Mountains Come out of the Sky: The Illustrated History of Prog Rock. Milwaukee, WI: Backbeat, 2010. Stump, Paul. The Music’s All That Matters. Chelmsford: Harbour, 2010.
2. The following is a summary of chapters two through four of Macan’s book.
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_mode#Modern. The names of the seven modern modes are Ionian, Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian, Locrian.
4. Bruford, Bill. Bill Bruford: The Autobiography: Yes, King Crimson, Earthworks, and More. London: Jawbone, 2009. p. 115.

—

Derek Hale has lived all of his life in Wichita, Kansas and isn’t a bit ashamed about that fact. He and his wife Nicole have only six children–four daughters and two young sons of thunder. Derek is a ruling elder, chief musician, and performs pastoral duties at Trinity Covenant Church (CREC). Derek manages a firmware lab for NetApp and enjoys reading, computers, exercising, craft beer, and playing and listening to music. But not all at the same time. He blogs occasionally at youdidntblogthat.tumblr.com.<>обслуживание веб овраскрутка в интернет

Read more

On March 31, 2014 By In Culture, Film

Christian Reviews of the Noah Movie

I have not seen the movie, but have read countless reviews. What follows are statements from five Christian thinkers about the movie:

Cal Beisner:

I saw Darren Aronofsky’s NOAH yesterday and actually enjoyed it. It was far less bad than I anticipated and in some respects was quite good. Its environmentalist message was muted from what one expected from the first script–still there, but not dominant. It (mostly) “gets” the sinfulness of man and the justice of God that responds in righteous wrath. It doesn’t get God’s mercy and grace or the way Noah and the flood and its aftermath presaged the person and atoning work of Christ. It pretty poignantly portrays the difficulties of a walk of faith and obedience to God, but because in it God Himself never speaks, it misses the real foundation of that faith–propositional revelation from the God who speaks and shows (to adopt the title of Carl F. H. Henry’s magnum opus).

Gregory Alan Thornbury:

In sum, Noah contains numerous plot points, devices, and characters that film critics can and will judge and critique. Over the years, I have taught philosophy of film in a number of educational and institutional settings. I have always had my students study Aronofksy, and I believe that this film, which he has said he wanted to be among his first, is a worthy addition to the body of his work. It is strikingly different, in important ways, from his previous films. For me, I found nothing more arresting and hopeless than the final scene of The Wrestler. In Noah, Aronofsky and Handel are wrestling with a different subject matter: theology. Their film will, I think, provoke heated biblical and theological conversations in restaurants and coffee shops after patrons see it. Christians might find it helpful to go see the film with people they know who have a lot of questions.

Steve Deace:

I even tried to watch it through the eyes of an unbeliever to find something redemptive about it, and I could not. For the life of me I cannot figure out why some people whose opinions I respect are endorsing this movie under any circumstances. Endorsing this movie is like our church fathers endorsing false Gnostic “gospels” because “even though they’re a total bastardization of the truth at least they’re a conversation starter.” Instead, our church fathers responded by writing works like Against Heresies to confront such lies. But I guess they just weren’t as enlightened or interested in cultural engagement as we are.

If the movie has a core message it’s that man is wicked but so is God, and God will actually bless our disobedience once we figure that out. It turns out the only truth Aronofsky told was when he said his Noah was “the least Biblical movie ever made.”

Brian Godawa:

Turning the tale of Noah into an environmentalist screed and animal rights diatribe does violence to the Biblical meaning and turns it into something entirely alien to the original meaning of the text. Admittedly, the script does include murder and violence against man as an additional “evil,” but this is secondary in the story. The primary sin of the script Noah is man’s violence against the environment. Which is kind of contradictory, don’t you think? Claiming that God destroys the entire environment because man was — well, destroying the environment?

Matt Walsh:

As a film, it’s like the script for a Syfy Network miniseries got shoved into a blender with the treatment for a Lifetime channel made-for-TV movie and then mixed with enough moping nihilism and environmentalist sermonizing to fool pretentious elitists into using words like ‘daring’ and ‘relevant’ when describing it. In other words, it’s aggressively abysmal.

But, as a money-making ploy, it’s a downright masterpiece.

 <>online gameраскрутка продвижение оптимизация

Read more

On March 28, 2014 By In Culture

Progressive Rock – A Cure for the Common Chord

A friend of mine maintains that Americans will go for just about anything as long as that thing is being pushed by a dapper gentleman sporting a proper British accent. This is probably even more true of American Christians, of whom I am one. We have a deep love for the works of C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, and J. K. Rowling. Our children have grown up on a steady diet of Thomas & Friends or Angelina Ballerina. Most of the Christian women I know (and even some of the men) are hopelessly addicted to Downton Abbey or Call the Midwife. Many Christians who grew up repulsed by The Beatles now cast a nostalgic eye backward toward a certain group of lovable moptops from Liverpool. Suffice it to say that many American Christians are hopeless Anglophiles ready to lap up just about anything from the UK.

One British export overlooked by the majority of Christians is that of progressive rock. Progressive rock–detested by music critics and the inspiration for the movie This is Spinal Tap–was born in the late 1960s in the hot house of British art schools, flourished in the 1970s, faded in the 1980s and 1990s in the wake of punk rock, new wave, and grunge, and is enjoying an unforeseen renaissance in the new millennium. My introduction to the world of progressive rock (also known as “prog” or “prog rock”) began in the early 70s when the song “Roundabout” by the band Yes was in heavy rotation on FM rock radio. I was a rock radio addict from an early age and I found myself attracted to any and all rock music with a progressive bent. Of course, I also found myself attracted to the music of KISS, but that is beyond the scope of this blog post.

An exact definition of “progressive rock music” is notoriously difficult to achieve. Depending upon whom you are talking to, Radiohead’s 1997 album OK Computer is pure progressive rock bliss while other hardcore fans tend to dismiss any album released after the mid-1970s as sub-prog. In his online article written for Slate, writer David Weigel quotes Greg Lake—one-third of prog rockers Emerson, Lake and Palmer—as saying, “Most rock music…was based upon the blues and soul music, and to some extent country and western, gospel. Whereas a lot of progressive music takes its influence from more European roots.” Brad Birzer–a Roman Catholic and the Russell Amos Kirk Chair in American Studies at Hillsdale College–wrote a piece for National Review in May 2012 in which he stated that progressive rock, “…aims to harmonize soul and mind and connect the horizontal to the vertical, the sea to the sky. It invites the listener in as a participant, immersing him fully into the art rather than placing the art (if most pop music can be called art) next to or near the listener.”

Birzer’s attempt at a proper definition for the music carries a great deal of weight in the prog rock community. He has done yeoman’s work in furthering the music’s current revival by founding Progarchy.com and by writing about the music periodically on The Imaginative Conservative web site.

Interestingly, mainstream Christian sites as First Things and World Magazine have begun to take notice of prog rock and its recent resurgence. A new generation of Christian listeners are discovering that progressive rock cares a great deal about big ideas such as truth, beauty, and goodness in ways that popular music would never attempt.

In the coming weeks I hope to draw the readers of Kuyperian Commentary into the world progressive rock music and act as a sort of tour guide–a guide that has been enjoying this music for nearly 40 years. Of course, our tour will take us beyond the borders of British progressive rock as we also explore prog from Canada (Rush, Saga), Sweden (The Flower Kings), Norway (Magic Pie), Italy (Premiata Forneria Marconi or PFM), Germany (RPWL), France (Magma), and the United States (Kansas, Dream Theater, Spock’s Beard).

If you come along on our tour, let me encourage you to give this music the same concentrated attention you would any other great symphony, painting, sculpture, ballet, or piece of literature. Doing so will expose you to some things that you find repugnant–the same sorts of emotions you might encounter going through an omnibus literature course. However, chances are good that you will discover a wealth of new music that will send your heart and mind soaring.

Finally, some humor to warm your heart and prove that prog rock is more than stuffy guys in capes singing songs about King Arthur.

—

Derek Hale has lived all of his life in Wichita, Kansas and isn’t a bit ashamed about that fact. He and his wife Nicole have only six children–four daughters and two young sons of thunder. Derek is a ruling elder, chief musician, and performs pastoral duties at Trinity Covenant Church (CREC). Derek manages a firmware lab for NetApp and enjoys reading, computers, exercising, craft beer, and playing and listening to music. But not all at the same time. He blogs occasionally at youdidntblogthat.tumblr.com.

 <>mobile oline gameпоисковая оптимизация ов в москве

Read more

On March 25, 2014 By In Culture, Family and Children

It’s a Selfie World Out There!

“A selfie is a type of self-portrait photograph, typically taken with a hand-held digital camera or camera phone.” a

It’s a selfie world out there. Instagram has enriched itself with millions self-portraits. Justin Bieber may have popularized it, if one dares give him original credit for anything, but it’s now a world-wide phenomenon. Amateur photographers hold in their hand the perfect camera. Change the camera to self with a simple touch, smile, and post!

I am not interested in going on an anti-selfie campaign. People are creative. They are made after a creative God. Sometimes selfies incorporate a level of art that is truly remarkable. God likes to showcase his creation. And so at times showcasing a picture of ourselves to the world is not necessarily harmful. Sometimes it is can be humorous. Sometimes it is pathetic. Sometimes one does not know what to think.

When mom takes a picture of her pregnant belly, I see life. When a young lady takes a picture of herself with her new engagement ring, I see joy. When a guy takes a picture showcasing his new pair of athletic shoes he worked hard to earn, I say, “kudos.” Now, when young ladies begin to display their body parts that are meant to be displayed only to their future or current husbands, I say, “what in the world are you thinking!” When a young boy takes 15 pictures a day of himself in every imaginable pose, I say, “where’s your father?”

So, yes. Selfies can be great. And they can also be remarkable testaments to a pathetically self-serving and self-glorifying culture.

And then there are people who take selfies to a whole new level.

Well, for most people, that compulsion is relatively harmless, but for 19-year-old Danny Bowman, it reportedly led to an attempted suicide.

The British teen spent up to 10 hours each day taking photos of himself on his iPhone, the Daily Mirror reports. The addiction became so debilitating that he dropped out of school and retreated into his home for six months.

“I was constantly in search of taking the perfect selfie and, when I realized I couldn’t, I wanted to die,” Bowman told the Daily Mirror. “I lost my friends, my education, my health and almost my life.” b

It’s a selfie world. It’s a world where self-promotion and an unquenchable desire to find meaning finds a little bit of satisfaction in a selfie; a temporary satisfaction that cannot be quenched, and the search for more satisfaction ensues until one realizes that meaning is simply not possible.

So, a few thoughts to the selfie culture–especially those in the church.

First, always examine the purpose of your selfie. What am I trying to represent to the world about the God I worship? Owning things is not sinful. But the central issue has to do with the role you place on these things in your life.

What is this selfie communicating to the possibly hundreds or thousands of people who will eventually come across this picture? Why do I think that a certain part of my body needs to be seen by others; some that I never met personally, and others that I will see tomorrow in class?

Second, by all means don’t read this as crusade against selfies. Take them. But take them to show the world how beautiful we become when we are in Christ. “Look at me. You see my joy in my new tie? If you know me you know that I treasure deeply the God who gave me this tie.”

Third, take fewer selfies. Period.

Fourth, when in doubt about the potential consequences about a selfie in a certain a pose or wearing a certain outfit, don’t post it. Keep it as private reminder of your self-restraint.

Finally, let’s turn a little of our attention from self-portraits to familial portraits. You know what the world knows little about: familial happiness. The abortion rate and the growing trend of unbiblical divorces continue to rise. Talk about an ugly selfie! We have in our society a pitiful view of what joyful family life is like. Use your camera–a great gift from God, by the way–to honor others. Put pictures of your brother or sister accomplishing something. Show the world that your life is not just centered around yourself, but on others also.

So, don’t give up your selfies. I will add a little Instagram heart to them when I see them. But for every selfie you take, make sure to take three non-selfies. And then show the world that the world of me is also about you.

<>racer game onlineмассовая проверка тиц и пр

  1. Wikipedia definition  (back)
  2. See full article: http://time.com/35701/selfie-addict-attempts-suicide/  (back)

Read more

On March 20, 2014 By In Culture, Politics

What can we learn from the death of Fred Phelps?

By Uri Brito

The incendiary founder of Westboro Baptist has died.

World reports:

Fred Phelps Sr., the founder of a Kansas sect known for its anti-homosexuality picketing at military funerals, has died. He was 84.

The former figurehead of Westboro Baptist Church was hospice-bound in Topeka, Kan., and had stopped eating and drinking at the time of his death on Wednesday night, his estranged son Nathan told the Associated Press on Sunday. Nathan Phelps said a new board of eight elders excommunicated his father last summer after a power struggle, possibly contributing to the decline in his health. “I’m not sure how I feel about this,” he wrote on Facebook. “Terribly ironic that his devotion to his god ends this way. Destroyed by the monster he made.” Nathan Phelps left the sect 37 years ago and is now a religious skeptic and gay-rights advocate.

Phelps’ Westboro Baptist–an unaffiliated church–will now be left in the hands of other family members who will most likely continue the vision of their leader.  A documentary was produced of the small Kansas congregation.

So, what can we learn from the death of Fred Phelps?

First, we learn that truth can be easily mis-applied. Phelps once noted that,  “you preach the Bible without preaching the hatred of God.” Any sober-minded interpreter will attest to the Scriptural God who condemns sin and acts justly against sin. Any sober-minded interpreter will realize that the Marcionite heresy of dividing the Old Testament God from the New is not an orthodox option. The same God who destroyed and killed evil societies also judged his own people. That same God promises everlasting judgment upon those who do not believe in his Son (John 3:36). But this God of vengeance (Psalm 94) is also a God of everlasting love (Psalm 36:7). To overemphasize his wrath and to build one’s entire ministry around the wrath of God is to offer an unbalanced picture of the God of the Bible.

Further, it must be emphasized that the God of the Bible stressed mercy before judgment. Our God is an all consuming grace before He is an all consuming fire. Jesus offered himself to the people of Israel in mercy before he came and destroyed Jerusalem (Mat. 23:37). Phelps emphasized the wrath of God, but that message obscured the mercy and grace of God toward sinners (I Peter 3:15).

Second, we learn that angering the leftists is not always in our best interest. The Left hated Phelps and his group. “The Westboro Baptist Church is probably the vilest hate group in the United the State of America,” Heidi Beirich, research director for the Montgomery, Ala.-based Southern Poverty Law Center, told The Associated Press in July 2011. Indeed those who are in darkness will despise the witness of the light, but sometimes we who are light can portray a dim light immersed in unfruitful activities in the name of the Gospel. Yes, they will persecute us, but let us be wise to not pursue unnecessary persecution. The Gospel itself is enough to gain enemies. Let us not then debase its purity by bringing evangelicals and God-haters together against a common cause.

Third, we learn that picketing at homosexual and military funerals is not the way of the Gospel, but it is a way of death itself. Though we may vehemently disagree on matters of foreign policy, military soldiers and their families have the right to grieve. Grieving is a necessary means of emotional and physical relief. Though we oppose homosexuality and the practice of it on biblical grounds, even homosexuals have the right–as image-bearers–to grieve for their loved ones. To not allow them to weep is to de-humanize men and women created in the image of God. Instead of picketing and protesting at funerals, Christians need to establish a vision of marital faithfulness that is compelling to those who have rejected the agenda of God for man and woman. By picketing and protesting, the Phelps clan left a poor example of Christian compassion rooted in the imago dei. We must oppose the homosexual agenda at all costs, but we must proclaim truth winsomely and holistically, realizing that we are dealing with fellow human beings created in the image of God.

Fourth, we learn that independent groups like Westboro Baptist suffer from a severe lack of accountability. This individualized ecclesiology leaves no room for correction. They are the end all of theological decisions. We need a catholic vision that allows the local church to be held accountable to and connected with other congregations. This does not necessarily require a formal connection–as I would propose–but even an informal one where there would be genuine opportunities to exhort and challenge others to godly practices.

Finally, we learn that the legacy we leave is fundamental to our vision as Christians. How will our children remember us? Will they remember a contentious father who viewed evangelism as a means to de-humanize others–however different their moral agenda was? Or will they view us as lovers of truth who practiced truth in love; rebuking and exhorting; calling evil, evil, but winsomely engaging those outside of the covenant with the message of hope and communicating salvation as a restoration of the whole cosmos? Calling homosexuals to repentance while guiding and shepherding them in the process?

The agenda of Fred Phelps failed to communicate what the Bible intends to communicate about the nature of God. His tactics brought great harm to the cause of Christ. Many–even in his own family who have fled–have been negatively affected by this cult-like groupa. Phelps’ death reminds us that the way you live and present the Gospel matters, and that your zeal for truth can actually work against truth itself.

<>текст для главной страницы а примерразместить на google

  1. According to World: ” The couple had 13 adult children, nine of whom remain in the church and four of whom have left the church, according to the Topeka Capital-Journal. Roughly 20 of the couple’s 54 grandchildren also have left the church.”  (back)

Read more

On March 19, 2014 By In Culture

Scott Walker quotes a Bible verse and the atheists are furious

By Uri Brito

Governor Scott Walker dared quote a bible reference on twitter. For many evangelicals, the brief reference to Philippians 4:13 is common Christian talk. “I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength.” Those familiar words carry great weight to evangelicals. We have all been taught from early on to trust in Christ and persevere while doing so. The problem is Scott Walker is an  elected official. And the Freedom from Religious Foundation knows it and wants him to do something about it. To be precise, they want him to delete his tweet. That’s right. In their own words:

… To say “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me,” seems more like a threat, or the utterance of a theocratic dictator, than of a duly elected civil servant.

As governor, you took an oath of office to uphold the entirely godless and secular U.S. Constitution. You have misused your secular authority and podium to promote not just religion over non-religion, but one religion over another in a manner that makes many Wisconsin citizens uncomfortable. On behalf of our membership, we ask you to immediately delete this religious message from your official gubernatorial Facebook and Twitter…

Look at the assumptions inherent in those statements. First, that the Pauline quotation was theocratic. Second, that the political pulpit is secular. And third, that Walker is upholding an entirely godless and secular Constitution. Now, say what you will about the Constitution, but godless–it is not.

Now, let’s get to the point. The charge of theocracy is a valid one.  A theocracy is simply a “rule by God.” Walker thought he was simply quoting an inspirational verse, but in reality the atheists are right. When you assert that strength comes from King Jesus you are affirming his kingship over all things, even the ability to rule rightly.

If the political pulpit is secular, meaning it derives its foundation on no religious grounds, then Walker’s assertion is a threat to a pluralistic society. and he should delete his tweet. But if Walker’s role as a Christian elected leader is first one of submission to the Triune God and secondly, to serve the people of  Wisconsin, then the Governor needs to consider the consequences of his tweet. Who are you serving, Governor?  If you can do all things through Christ, then have the courage to live consistently your faith in your political office, and while you’re at it, tell FFRF to bring it on.<>yandex регистрация а в каталоге

Read more

On March 13, 2014 By In Culture, Family and Children, Wisdom

Pursuing Hospitality: What About Non-Christians?

One of the great difficulties for many of us is that we have friends or family members that are non-Christians. How do we practice hospitality towards those who are not believers? Each situation is different and will require wisdom, but here are some basic guidelines. If you have questions about a specific situation then should to talk to your elders. In this post I am addressing inviting a pagan for dinner. I do not address a more complicated issue: should I allow a non-Christian to live with me (for example a wayward cousin who needs a place to stay) for a period of time.

First, showing hospitality to non-believers can be a good way to evangelize. There is no better picture of the gospel than eating and drinking with sinners. One of the best ways to show people Christ is by inviting them into your home and letting them see your daily living. This would include prayer before meals, family worship, discipline of the children, love for your wife, etc. In other words, if someone comes in to your home for an evening they should see Christ preached through the way you live. But do not use the meal as a way to “spring the gospel on them.” If you invite them over for a meal, invite them over for a meal. Don’t tell them it is a meal and the try to slide the gospel in the backdoor. That way they know what they are getting into and don’t feel duped. Of course, if the opportunity arises to talk about Christ take it.  And you could always tell a non-Christian you are inviting them over to tell them about Jesus. My point is be up front.  Don’t present it is a casual dinner and then put on the pressure.

Second, you should not generally invite someone into your home who claims to be a Christian, but is living in open unrepentant sin. Do not sit down at a table, pretending the person is a brother or sister in Christ, while they are engaged in high handed rebellion against God. I Corinthians 5:9-11 makes this clear. It can be difficult to determine how far to take these verses, especially in an age where churches do not practice discipline. It is possible for someone to be in full communion at your local church and be living in complete rebellion against God. If you have questions I would encourage you to talk to your elders.

Third, you should be careful when inviting over non-Christians who are promoting their non-Christian worldviews, especially if you have children. I would invite over a sexually immoral non-Christian. However, I would not invite over a sexually immoral non-Christian who wanted me to join them in their sexual immorality or worse was interested in getting my children to see things their way. Usually, this is not the case. Most non-Christians you invite into your home will know you are a Christian and will respect that. However, as our society becomes more anti-Christian do not be surprised if non-Christians try to persuade your children or you on your own turf. If the person is recruiting for the world, you should be cautious in inviting them in.

Jesus Eating With Sinners

Fourth, you should be cautious about going and eating dinner with non-Christians in their home. When you go into someone’s house you are subject to their rules. There may be occasions where this is okay. But I would normally advise against it, especially if the pagan is recruiting for the world. Try to invite them into your home or go to dinner with them at a restaurant instead. The exception here is if they are interested in Christ and invite you into their home to learn more. I think many examples we have of Christ going into the homes of sinners falls in this category. They wanted to hear from Jesus.  If people want to know more about who you serve by all means go to their home and tell them.

Finally, the priority in your hospitality should be Christians. These two verses make that point: John 13:35 and Galatians 6:10. If you can minister to non-believers you should. And don’t make the verses above an excuse to avoid non-believers. But if you have to make a choice, and some of us do, then invite over Christians. As John 13:35 points out, this is evangelism.<>генератор ключевых слов

Read more