Gun Control?

                There has been a lot of discussion lately about gun control and the 2^nd Amendment. There have been too many mass shootings this year for this discussion not to take place. Too many innocent lives have been lost and there are simply too many guns just floating around for anybody to get their hands on. The so-called “left” is pushing for heavier gun control regulations which would inflict more stringent background checks on gun buyers, elimination of military style assault rifles and 100 round magazines from the public market. On the other hand, the so-called “right” is very adamant about defending our 2^nd Amendment right to bear arms, and to cap it all off, The National Rifle Association is calling for armed police and guards in schools. I would like to weigh in on the debate for just a moment from three perspectives: political, social, and spiritual.

            From a political standpoint, I in no way believe that gun control regulations are in violation of the 2^nd Amendment, and I wish the far right would understand this. No one is trying to take away your guns! They are trying to “control” who has access to guns and what kinds should be available! As was pointed out in another article I read, times were very different when the 2^nd Amendment was written. First of all, it was written in post-revolutionary war America to ensure that Americans would have protection from any other Red Coats or militias that would try to impose themselves on us. Second, they used muskets that took almost 2 minutes to reload one round, not 100 round semi-automatic pistols or rifles. The context and the situation are completely different. That being said, perhaps the 2^nd Amendment should be updated to reflect a 21^st century world. The context that produced the 2^nd Amendment in the 18^th century is most definitely not the context of the 21^st century.

            From a social perspective, I am trying to understand what in the world is wrong with us?! Pundits that are blaming these mass shootings on access to guns and mass media refuse to acknowledge that other countries have just as many guns and just as much media exposure. In his documentary Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore showed that countries like Canada, Japan, England and Germany have just as many guns per capita. They also view just as many violent movies, listen to just as much violent music and play just as many violent video games as we do in America, yet have nowhere near the amount of violent crimes that we do. Pundits will then argue that America’s violent past and history is the source of such violence. But as Moore’s film pointed out, are we saying that Nazi Germany’s history isn’t as violent as Americas? Or the British Empire? So violent history has nothing to do with it. What does? In my opinion, there is simply something wrong with us as Americans. If other countries have the same access to guns, violent media, and just as violent a history, why do they all have violent crimes in the hundreds or under while America’s yearly violent crimes totals over 50,000? Perhaps it is part of that age-old prophecy in Revelation that America “looks like a lamb, but speaks like a dragon…”.

            This leads me to my final observation which is spiritual. Things are not going to get better. Gun control laws are not going to stop anything. Armed guards in schools are not going to stop anything. And even the elimination of violent media will do nothing to change the situation that we find ourselves in. Plain and simple, we are living in the last days of earth’s history. I know it’s been said to death, but I see no other explanation. Not only have violent crimes and mass murders been on the rise, but deadly natural disasters are at an all-time high. The world is spiraling out of control, and only Christ can save it now. The world is beyond man’s ability to fix it. Indeed, we ruined it. We need Jesus to come to fix this wretched place. In the meantime, we Christians are to be His representatives on earth. We need to let people know that only Christ can save the world, and only Christ can save the soul. Let us be beacons of hope in this dark age. Christ IS coming back, and He’s coming VERY soon.

Shalom

Lupe's Fiasco and Hip Hop's Culture of Violence

            Last week, rapper Lupe Fiasco announced on Twitter that after his next album, slated to be released on September 25, he would retire from music. He said this as a reaction to a threat on Twitter by fellow Chicago rapper Chief Keef. A few weeks earlier, Lupe had this to say in an interview by a Baltimore radio station: “Chief Keef scares me. Not him, specifically but just the culture that he represents, specifically in Chicago…the murder rate in Chicago is sky-rocketing and when you see who’s doing it and perpetrating it they all look like Chief Keef”. Chief Keef responded by calling Fiasco a series of derogatory names and claiming he would smack him when he saw him. Lupe then responded with a series of tweets noting his discouragement saying “But my heart is broken and I see no comfort further along this path only more pain. I cannot participate any longer in this … My first true love was literature so I will return to that … Lupe Fiasco ends here”.

                I can understand Lupe’s frustration. Lup has always made music that was counter-cultural and made the listener think (God forbid music making us have to think…) and as a result, his music has never been widely popular as far as the mainstream is concerned. While having every excuse for being a product of the culture and environment he was raised in, Lupe chose another route. Lupe Fiasco, like Keef, grew up on Chicago’s westside, which was replete with gangs and violence. Lupe could have chosen, like many other rappers, to make harder music, taking the “I’m rapping about where I’m from” route.  However, he made a conscious decision to stay above the fray because as he put it six years ago, “This isn’t cool. There’s nothing cool about how I grew up. There’s nothing cool about the projects”. Nonetheless, many rappers like Chief Keef decide to glorify these lives of gang violence and savagery, in large part due to the money-hungry record labels that could care less about how many youth are killed each year in Chicago as long as they get their cut.

                Lupe’s voice is more needed in hip hop now than ever. Labels and radio stations are more hit-driven than ever before and hip hop needs a balance; it always has. While NWA was pushing their gangsta revolution, there was the Fresh Prince and Jazzy Jeff talking about the teenage trials of the day. When Snoop and Dre were taking us to Deathrow, Public Enemy was calling us to “fight the power”. There has always been balance in hip hop, but that balance seems to be fading in today’s music. Lupe Fiasco provides that balance by accepting a calling higher than making hits and stacking dollars. His calling is education. He wants the listener to think about what they’re listening to and about the things they value most.

                 As Lupe put it, in some respects hip hop is as good as it’s ever been. It’s more technically flawless; the beats and production are better; the lyrics are as clever and witty as ever, but it lacks one essential component: substance. The substance in the music is perhaps at its worst since the inception of the art form. It is replete with aggression, sexuality, and materialism, which are the three main components of the downfall of a nation or society. The young black community is on pace for genocide and hip hop is providing the soundtrack. So even though I know he will never see this, I hope Lupe continues to fight the good fight. Be not discouraged by ignorance and opposition, but be encouraged by those young minds that you have touched. His voice provides the prophetic balance that calls hip hop to be better and more responsible. He lets us know that we do not have to be products of our environments but that we can transcend our environments and rise above our circumstances and make a difference in this world. So it is our responsibility to be more cautious about what message we support with our money and attention. The violence and the killing HAS to stop, and hip hop MUST cease to be the soundtrack to the genocide of its own people. Let us rise above like Lupe and be voices crying out in the wilderness of mainstream media.

Shalom

PEACE be unto you

How Far is Too Far?

                Ok, I cannot hold this blog post any longer. I don’t know how many people will care about this particular post but I have to get it off my chest. The question is, how far do we go in order to reach the lost? To what extent do we make ourselves “available” to the unsaved in order to reach them? Before I endeavor to answer any of these questions let me back up and explain where they come from.

             Christian hip hop artist Lecrae is currently positioned to be perhaps the most important artist in the history of Christian rap. The mainstream exposure he has attained in the larger hip hop world is unprecedented. First, he was a participant in the 2011 BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher, and was the first “Christian” rapper to do so. Several things set him apart from the other emcees: his lyricism and flow were impeccable, and he boldly proclaimed the name of Jesus Christ and was 100% “unashamed” as is his mantra. This was probably the beginning of Lecrae’s mainstream rise. His album sales shot up on iTunes, mainstream hip hop magazines and sites such as XXL, the Source, and allhiphop.com began scrambling for interviews and stories to discover just who this young “Jesus-spitting” artist was and whether or not he was the real deal. All the sudden, this Houston-born rapper who was at the top of his respective totem pole was now placed at the bottom of a much larger pool.

            The next thing that began to catapult Lecrae to mainstream notice was his recent release of a mixtape entitled Church Clothes. What was so special about this mixtape? For starters, the day it was released, it was a trending topic on Twitter. No, not a passing, local trend, but a worldwide trending topic. The next thing that set this mixtape apart was that Lecrae worked with well known secular producers such as Don Cannon, 9^th Wonder and Boi-1da.

            Furthermore, with the release of this mixtape, Lecrae began to proclaim that he no longer wanted to be “boxed in” by being labeled a “Christian” rapper. He wanted to be known as just another rapper in the world of hip hop that rapped according to his particular niche and convictions. His argument stemmed from the fact that artists like Lupe Fiasco and Freeway aren’t known as “Muslim rappers”, nor is the Wu-Tang Clan known as a “Five-Percenter” group. If they aren’t so labeled and categorized he felt it was not fair to box him in as a “Christian rapper”. It is key to understand that Lecrae was not saying he no longer wanted to boldly rap about Christ, but that he didn’t want the label of “Christian rapper” that has, for many years, carried a very negative connotation, to limit the expanse of his message. Church Clothes was still very much a Christian album and the message of the gospel was in no way compromised.

            Now Lecrae is gearing up for the release of his 6^th studio album, Gravity. This is perhaps the most important album of his career. His goal on this album is not to make music just for people that are already believers, but to reach out in a powerful way to non-believers; to make his music accessible to the mainstream while not conforming to it. The big controversy that arose from this album (which hasn’t even been released yet) is that there is a notable collaboration with known secular rapper Big K.R.I.T. Finally, it was revealed this week that Lecrae would be featured on Saigon’s upcoming album.

            So now the stage is set, and we can ask the previous questions again. Lecrae claims that he is not adjusting the content of his albums, but the coloring if you will. The sound is more accessible, and the message is more palatable to the mainstream listener. But has Lecrae gone too far? Is having a popular secular artist featured on his album or agreeing to feature on a secular artist’s album going too far? I say absolutely NOT! I think Lecrae understands what it takes to reach this generation of postmodern, agnostic, church-hating, Christ-lovers. It isn’t preaching and it isn’t a traditional OR contemporary church service. It is relationships. This generation (The Mosaics, Millennials, etc) is HUGE on relationships. In order to get anywhere with them one must first build significant relationships with them. By interacting with secular artists and producers, Lecrae is building relationships and impacting change. Some say this is compromise…I disagree. Jesus too was labeled an infidel for “entertaining” the presence of “sinners” and “undesirables”. But Jesus knew the difference between “hanging out” and reaching people where they were. Christ’s goal was always to engage people in order to bring them the message of salvation and I believe Lecrae’s goal is the same.

            We do not know the long-term effects of Lecrae’s relationship-building endeavors. I mean, what if Saigon or Big K.R.I.T. were to accept Christ like former Clipse member Malice (now No Malice) or 106 & Park freestyle star Jin? If these guys will not seek the council of a typical pastor, why shouldn’t Lecrae be their pastor? I do not doubt that if these guys needed council or help that they would reach out to Lecrae because he has made himself accessible. We should all be accessible enough to reach those in need. Perhaps Lecrae is exactly what hip hop needs. Perhaps he was raised up for such a time as this.

Even Thugs Cry, But Do the Lord Care?

 Part 2 of my religion and Hip Hop series examines the question of theodicy (God's allowing suffering) and how it impacts Hip Hop's hermeneutic.

 

If God is really good how can He allow evil and suffering in the world? This is essentially the issue that theodicy deals with. However, its primary concern is with the goodness of God. Belief systems such as deism, agnosticism, and atheism have even gone so far as to question God’s actual existence. All because they cannot seem to reconcile God’s claims to be good and involved in human life and the ever present reality of suffering and oppression in the world.

 

Hip-hop as a culture, and rap the mouthpiece of that culture, voice some of the same concerns. In fact, the issue of suffering and oppression is central to hip-hop’s hermeneutic. They approach the Bible to see what it has to say about their existential situation and if it provides any relief. It is only as good as it helps me to survive “these streets”. In the classic “hood” movie Boyz N the Hood, there is a conversation between the character Doughboy (played by gangsta rapper Ice Cube) and his posse. When asked whether he thinks God exists Doughboy replies, “man there ain’t no God. If there was a God, why He keep lettin’ all these brothaz get smoked out here everyday?”.[1] In another “hood” movie, Menace II Society, the character O-Dog (dubbed the “craziest nigga alive”) responds to a question posed by his friend’s grandfather: “I don’t think God even cares about us out here [the ghetto]. Why else would he have put us here?”. Notice, in the first quote the assertion was made that there is no God, while the second quote does not deny God’s existence but His goodness and concern for human beings (specifically young black males). Here are the two spectrums of the reaction to the issue of theodicy within hip-hop culture!

It should be noted here that hip-hop is rooted in the struggle for social justice. In truth, it was the driving force that started hip-hop! It was the voice of a disenfranchised group who decided it was time to tell their story. Everything in hip-hop, from the gritty beats that cannot help but transport the listener to the streets of New York, Compton, or Atlanta, to the blues samples that provide the melodic tune tells of the pain and suffering of inner-city life for young black males. It is in light of this sense of communal suffering that any critique or evaluation of the Bible, the church, or religion in general is made.     Take for instance, Tupac’s response to a question about churches in black communities. “If the churches took half the money that they was making and gave it back to the community, we’d be aight!” He continues, “Have you seen some of these god**** churches lately? There’s ones that take up the whole block in New York! There’s homeless people out here!! Why won’t God let them stay there?!” It is clear that Tupac’s angst is not with the church’s teachings, but its activism, or lack thereof. He essentially asks the question “what are you doing for the community?” In hip-hop, this is the primary question. Those who have influence in this culture are those who are concerned about the suffering, pain, and death experienced by young blacks in the ghettos. In truth, this pain and suffering was most eloquently and powerfully expressed by Tupac Shakur.

His was a life particularly ridden with pain being the son of a revolutionary. His mother, Afeni Shakur was a prominent member in the New York chapter of the Black Panther Party. It does not need to mentioned the obstacles and hardships faced by black revolutionaries during the 60’s and 70’s. But what has typically been overlooked is the impact this must have had on their children. Tupac’s music is a transcript of his short, yet troubled life. His life and words are also intentionally representative of the lives of thousands of young black males trapped in the “cage” of the ghetto. This experience of suffering has had an impact on Tupac’s (and all of hip-hop’s) relationship to the Bible and religion. His cry, “even thugs cry/ but do the Lord care?” is telling. In Tupac’s eyes, thugs were not irresponsible hooligans who just robbed and killed for the fun of it. Thugs are the product of the neglect of society. He even created an acronym for it: The Hate U Gave Little Infants F***s Everyone. These are the disenfranchised of society who feel that they have no other choices. So does the Lord care about them? Other questions such as “I wonder if heaven has a ghetto” and “is there a heaven for a G [gangsta]” tell of the thought process of this young man and the generation he represented.

Consider this lyric from his song “Blasphemy”: “The preacher wants me buried, why? Cause I know he’s a liar/ have you ever seen a crackhead, that’s eternal fire”. Here is a prime example of hip-hop’s use and interpretation of the Bible. He is clearly familiar with the biblical teaching of punishment and hell fire. However, he reinterprets the traditional view in light of what he sees around him everyday. And truly, if anyone has lived with or been around an addicted person[2], it is not a pretty sight. Therefore, eternal punishment is reinterpreted as addiction. This is completely permissible in hip-hop’s hermeneutical method. This is not to say that Tupac or any other artist does not have a clear concept of sin and its consequences. Even a frivolous listen to some of Tupac’s songs would quickly repudiate that idea. Rather, the consequences of sin in many instances are seen as more desirable than the current situation they find themselves in!

“God forgive me cause it’s wrong but I plan to die” Tupac cries in the song “Troublesome ‘96”. He continues, “Either take me to heaven and understand I was a G/ did the best I could raised in insanity/ or send me to hell cause I ain’t worried about my life/ ain’t nothing worse than this cursed a** helpless life!” This is a powerfully striking statement! He recognizes that the direction he is going in is wrong yet there is still a cry for mercy. However, this is not a cry of renunciation. He is doing what he feels he has to do given the situation he has found himself in (“I did the best I could raised in insanity”). And, according to Tupac, the consequences of this course of action (hell), can not conceivably be worse than the situation he finds himself in now. It should also be noted that this line is directly connected to a cry made earlier in the song: “I’m hopeless!!” This feeling of hopelessness has led to a type of anarchic nihilism in hip-hop culture. As Malcolm X himself once said, “The most dangerous man in the world is the man with nothing to lose”.

The situation of misery and oppression that many of these artists have come up in is the starting point of their hermeneutic. Similar to Dr. James Cone’s method, they read their sitz em laben (situation in life) into the text rather than having the text speak to their situation. The conclusion is, if the Bible has nothing to say to my immediate situation, I have the liberty to reinterpret it so that it does. An example of this reinterpretation is Tupac’s concept of “Thugz Mansion” which is essentially a type of heaven for thugs.[3] It is clear that this is a reinterpretation that seeks to absolve one of his/her moral or religious obligations thereby creating, what I have termed, a “Jesus walks with me” theology. This will be the topic for next week.

 

 

If there is any goodness found in this work, then that goodness belongs to the Creator. If there are any mistakes or shortcomings, those are mine.

 

---

[1] It should be noted that these so-called “hood” movies are really a genre unto themselves. They are movies that deal with the harsh realities of life in the inner city, also termed “the hood”.

[2] Tupac is speaking particularly from the heart on this line. His mother struggled with crack addiction for several years in Tupac’s teen years.

[3] The length restrictions of this paper will not allow me to elaborate on this point but it should be noted that “Thugz Mansion” is an attempt find peace and rest in the midst of the proverbial storm. A line from the song illustrates this: “where do niggaz go when we die? Ain’t no heaven for a thug nigga. That’s why we go to thug mansion.” Remember that the embrace of “thug life” is more of an obligation than a real choice.

"It's All the Same to Me" Postmodernism and its Impact on Hip Hop's Biblical Understanding

For the next few weeks I will be doing a series on Hip Hop, specifically, how Hip Hop culture engages with religion and the Bible. Just for clarification of terms, “hermeneutics” refers to the lenses through which one studies, reads and interprets the Bible. Some may be saying, “Hip Hop has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible!” Many would agree that hip-hop is clearly in opposition and rebellion against everything the Bible teaches and stands for! Nevertheless, hip-hop draws from the Bible and biblical images more than one might think. In fact, hip-hop is obsessed with it!! Various songs contain cries and pleas for God: His presence, His mercy, His forgiveness, His peace, His deliverance, and His guidance. Numerous music videos and even album covers contain religious symbolism and invoke biblical images to get their message across. This series will explore how Hip Hop’s use of biblical and religious images and symbolism gives us insight to Hip Hop’s “hermeneutic” or interpretation of the Bible. The first such segment will explore Hip Hop and postmodernism.

It is no secret that we live in an age that has been classified as “postmodern”. The precise meaning of this term, however, is quite ambiguous and open to interpretation (ironically right in line with postmodern principles). Webster’s College Dictionary defines the term this way: of or pertaining to any of various movements in architecture, the arts, and literature developing in the late 20^th century in reaction to the precepts…of modernism. So postmodernism is essentially a reaction to modernism. This begs the question, what is modernism? What were its “precepts” and tenets? Being that this is not a paper on postmodernism, this subject will not be dealt with exhaustively. Our purposes here are to provide a basic summary of postmodernism and then evaluate its influence and impact on hip-hop culture and hermeneutics.

English writer and theologian David Cook says this: “Postmodernism moves beyond the ‘modern’, scientifically based view of the world by blending a skepticism about technology, objectivity, absolutes and total explanations with the exploration of every spiritual and material perspective.”[1] Modernism’s emphasis was on science. Science and technology were going to be the savior of mankind. I like to describe modernism in terms of the popular TV show that arose as a result of its ideas, Star Trek. In my estimation, Star Trek summarizes the main tenets of the modern perspective. The main gist of the show was that through science and technological advances, mankind rose above all its problems and ascended to a new level of evolutionary existence. In the motion picture, Star Trek First Contact, Captain Picard explains to an earth-woman he had met that humanity no longer suffers from divisions and wars. When asked about his financial stability he replies “The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force for humanity in the 24^th century. We work to better ourselves and all mankind”. The idea is that humanity is capable of solving its own problems through the advance of reason, science, and technology.

Postmodernism, is essentially a reaction to, and rejection of this idea. It was quickly realized that instead of advancing humanity, technology was contributing to its destruction! Instead of helping find cures for cancer, it helped discover how to burst an atom to destroy thousands of people. Rather than making warfare more “civil” and efficient, it has only made it more brutal and inhumane. Nihilism and hopelessness are the children of this age. Stanley Grenz puts it this way, “postmodernism replaces the optimism of the last century with a gnawing pessimism…Members of the emerging generation are no longer confident that humanity will be able to solve the world’s great problems.”[2] In general, the postmodern worldview is that “no worldview exists”.[3] Its main tenets could be summarized as follows: a reaction against modernity, a rejection of objective truth, skepticism and suspicion of authority, a continued search for the transcendent, materialism, and individualistic pluralism.[4]

Now the question is, what has postmodernity to do with hip-hop? The answer is simple: postmodernity is hip-hop and hip-hop is postmodernity!! The main aspect of postmodernity I would like to focus on in this section is what Smith and Jackson call, “the culture of questioning everything”.[5] Hip-hop is rooted in this idea of questioning everything. In truth, it is very much in line with the postmodern principle of innate suspicion of authority and institutions. Hip-hop has thus questioned just about every authority and institution that has shaped American society, especially the place of police (basically the entire criminal justice system), the government and, surprisingly enough, the Christian church.[6] It should be noted here that social movements such as civil rights and the black power movement, along with religious movements like the Nation of Islam form some of the roots of hip-hop culture. These movements radically questioned the Christian churches validity and effectiveness for young black Americans.

Keeping this line of thought, hip-hop has questioned just about every “truth” that society tries to impose upon it. In his song “Rock N Roll”, conscious rapper Mos Def questions the true origins of the musical art form saying, “Elvis Presley ain’t got no soul/ Little Richard is rock n roll/ you might dig on the Rolling Stones/ but they ain’t come up wit that style on their own”. Rapper Kanye West, in his album College Dropout, questions whether it is really necessary to go to college to achieve success (using his own example). Rapper Common questions “what if God was a her?” in his song “Faithful”. Slain rapper Tupac Shakur questioned the relevance of the educational system for poor, inner-city black youth. “I think that we got so caught up in school being a tradition that we stopped using it as a learning tool, which it should be…I’m learning about the basics, but they’re not basic for me….To get us ready for today’s world [the present curriculum] is not helping”.[7] Hip-hop is truly a culture of questioning.

So how does this affect hip-hop’s hermeneutic? What impact do the postmodern traits of universal questioning and institutional suspicion have on hip-hop’s interpretation of the Bible? Fundamentally, it has created a type of religious pluralism where no one religion can claim to have all truth. As noted earlier, hip-hop is automatically suspicious of institutions (primarily because institutions have proven themselves untrustworthy). Therefore, any church or religion that claims to be or have absolute authority or truth is automatically viewed with suspicion. Take a lyric by Philadelphia rapper, Black Thought: “Sex, drugs, murder, politics and religion/ forms of hustling…”.[8] Hip-hop is fundamentally distrustful of any religion that makes an outstanding claim to truth.[9] Well this poses a very potent problem with Christianity and its Bible that claims to be the exclusive Word of God. Rapper Talib Kweli says this: “Who was King James?/ and why did he think it was so vital to remove chapters and make his own version of the Bible”.[10]            So the Bible cannot even truly be trusted! This inevitably creates, what has been termed in the academic community, religious pluralism. In the everyday language of everyday people it is adequately termed “survival”. These people are so frequently lied to by social and government institutions that they feel it necessary to be suspicious so as to not be sucked in by another “hustle”.  There is no absolute truth in one religion, but they all hold information that can lead any of their adherents to God. Consider this striking statement made by Chicago born rapper, Common: “As a child given religion with no answer to why/ just told believe in Jesus cause for me he did die”.[11] So first, he questions the validity of a religion evidently handed down from his parents. It seems that Common is addressing a type of religious ritual or formalism that takes place in many Christian families across the country: church. If we had a tally of how many children were dragged to church on Sunday or Saturday mornings with no other reason than the threat of a belt, I doubt this page could contain the results. Common’s statement also suggests a sort of agitation at the fact that he was brought up with only one religious viewpoint. “Just told believe in Jesus cause for me he did die”.

His next few lines will illustrate what he did with this youthful frustration. “My mind had dealt with the books of Zen, Tao, the lessons/ Koran and the Bible, to me they all vital/ and got truth within ‘em, gotta read them boys/ you just can’t skim ‘em, different branches of belief/ but one root that stem ‘em”.[12] As a reaction against his seemingly narrow upbringing, he took it upon himself to investigate some of the other religious claims ranging from Buddhism to Islam. His conclusion? “To me they all vital and got truth within ‘em”! Now do we object that some truth can be found in other religions? I hope not. I hope we are not that narrow. However, for us, the Bible still holds the absolute authority and is the basis by which we judge the “truth” in the other religions. For Common however, (and here Common is representative of hip-hop as a whole) the only authority by which to judge this truth is rooted in survival. Truth is that which can help one survive in this life. Author Terrence Tilley points out concerning hip-hop’s grandparent, the blues, that for blues artists, “truth is experience and experience is the truth”.[13] I believe the same observation can be made of hip-hop.

Consider the next line: “Who am I or they to say to whom you pray ain’t right/ that’s who got you doin right and got you this far/ whether you say ‘in Jesus name’ or ‘Al-hum-du’Allah’”.[14] In Common’s eyes, nobody has the right to dictate the “rightness” or “wrongness” of a religion that has helped one survive. A lyric in Talib Kweli’s song, “Give ‘Em Hell” has the same ring to it, “So it all sounds the same to me/ that’s why when they say one is right and the other is wrong it just sounds like a game to me”. Numerous other artists deal with the same issues and they are all saying essentially the same thing: all of these religions and their holy books are valid paths to God and no one of them has absolute truth. There is a rampant pluralism that exists within hip-hop that makes pinpointing an actual hermeneutic a very difficult task. However, even with hip-hop’s pluralism, some things that were mentioned earlier are essential to understanding the key to unlocking hip-hop’s hermeneutic. We noted that hip-hop’s critique of the Bible or any religion and religious book is rooted in that which helps us survive in this life. This leads us to the major issue that drives hip-hop’s hermeneutic which will be explored next week: the question of theodicy or suffering.

If there was any goodness or merit found here, that goodness and merit is from the Creator. If there were any flaws or errors, those were mine. Blessings

---

[1] David Cook, Blind Alley Beliefs (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996), 9.

[2] Stanley Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 3.

[3] Graham Johnston, Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-first Century Listeners (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2001), 27.

[4] Ibid, 26.

[5] Smith and Jackson, The Hip-Hop Church, 103.

[6] It would be more accurate to say organized religion as a whole, but this will be explored later.

[7] This is taken from a homemade interview of Tupac when he was 17 years old.

[8] The Roots, “It Don’t Feel Right”. Game Theory (Def Jam Records, 2006).

[9] It should be noted here that while this statement is true in general, there are many hip-hop artists that subscribe completely to a religion, even though it is mostly Islam.

[10] Talib Kweli, “Give Em Hell”. Ear Drum (Blacksmith/Warner Bros Records, 2007).

[11] Common, “G.O.D. (Gaining One’s Definition)”. One Day it Will All Make Sense (1997)

[12] Ibid

[13] Anthony B. Pinn. Why Lord?: Suffering and Evil in Black Theology. (New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 1995) 118.

[14] Ibid

Church Clothes

            Several months ago Christian rapper Lecrae released a mixtape entitled Church Clothes. The mixtape has gotten rave reviews from underground and mainstream hip hop outlets such as allhiphop.com (see attached link) [http://allhiphop.com/2012/05/18/mixtape-review-lecraes-church-clothes/ ] and XXL magazine. Lecrae has been making his way into more mainstream circles as of late, especially since appearing in the BET Hip Hop Awards cypher last year and unashamedly repping Jesus all the way through. I have another post planned for Lecrae and his request to not be labeled as a “Christian” rapper but just a rapper. This post, however, is to talk about the concept of the aforementioned mixtape Church Clothes. The concepts behind the project were 1) to make music that was more accessible to those outside of the body of faith, and 2) to address one of the key reasons and excuses the unchurched used for not coming to church: attire. One of the first things you are likely to hear when inviting a friend to church is “I don’t have anything to wear!” Why is this excuse so common? Why is it even an excuse at all? On what grounds do we insist that people must dress up in order to come to church? While I believe many would agree that they would not impose this on newcomers or those that cannot afford “appropriate” attire, we impose it on each other. And even in the case of those newcomers we teach that eventually they will “grow in grace” and come dressed in a suit and tie. Where does this tradition come from? Is it just tradition or does it have scriptural foundation? These are a few questions I will explore in the coming paragraphs.

            Dressing up for church is a fairly recent phenomenon. It began in the late-eighteenth century with the Industrial Revolution and really picked up by the mid-nineteenth century. Before this time dressing up for social events or church was reserved for the very wealth, mostly because only they could afford it![1] The Industrial Revolution changed this by mass-producing textiles so that clothing became more accessible and affordable to the common man. The middle class was born, and with it the desire to emulate aristocracy.

            Many Christian groups in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries opposed this trend. John Wesley and his Methodist movement along with Baptists and several others wrote against expensive and flashy clothing.[2] Ellen White even wrote to early Adventists about simplicity of dress. Nonetheless, the rising middle class would not be tamed. They desired bigger homes, better cars and flashier clothes.[3] In 1843, an influential Congregational minister named Horace Bushnell published an essay stating that sophistication and refinement were attributes of God and that Christians should emulate them.[4] Thus was born the idea of dressing up for church to please God. We see that this idea has nothing to do with the Bible, Jesus or God at all, but everything to do with status and showmanship. For many of us, church is just a time to dress nice since we don’t get that opportunity during the week.

            Why is this a big deal? It is a big deal because real people with real issues feel that church isn’t for them. Church is for people who “have it all together”, and this image of “having it all together” is perpetuated by us dressing up. We look great on the outside while the issues of the inside are hardly dealt with. If the church is truly supposed to be a hospital for those sick with sin, then why are all the doctors, nurses, and patients dressed like they are going to the governor’s ball? Shouldn’t those in the hospital be in scrubs and hospital gowns? In the same way, should not those of us in the church shed our elitist costumes and present ourselves as we really are: real, broken people in need of saving grace. There is a lack of intimacy, accountability and “realness” in many of our churches. Perhaps if we shed all of our “put on” attitudes and attire we will reach a place where we can be open and honest with each other about who we really are. Maybe it’s time to shed our church clothes for true robes of righteousness.

If there is any goodness or merit found here that goodness belongs to the Creator. If there is any fault or shortcomings, those belong to me.

---

[1] Max Barsis, The Common Man through the Centuries (New York: Unger, 1973)

[2] Rupert Davies, A History of the Methodist Church (London: Epworth, 1965), 193

[3] Richard Bushman, The Refinement of America (New York: Knopf, 1992) 335, 352

[4] Ibid, 328,331

The Dark Knight Rises

            I must start off by sending out my deepest and heartfelt condolences to all the victims and families affected by the terrible shooting in Colorado. This issue should raise awareness and questions on several levels: issues of gun control in this country, safety and the lack of security in movie theaters, and most importantly, that Christ is truly coming soon! What it should absolutely not do, however, is detract from the brilliant film The Dark Knight Rises. First of all, the shooter clearly came to the theater with a plan that he had formulated before seeing the film. Second, reports are saying that he claimed that he was the Joker, the villain of the previous Nolan film. I am already seeing media outlets and even preachers starting to blame this shooting on the Batman mythos in general and The Dark Knight Rises in specific. I think this is unfair to the film and to Batman fans that know what the character and the storylines truly stand for.

            That being said, I would like to give my comments on the film (no spoilers) and on what makes Batman so special and unique in comic book mythology. I thought this was a truly brilliant film. I would dare say it was one of the best movies I’ve ever seen. Given, I may be a little biased because, as any of my closest friends know, I am a huge Batman fan. It was a phenomenal conclusion to an amazing vision by Christopher Nolan. The movie runs fluidly and keeps the audience so engaged that they don’t realize they have been sitting for almost three hours. The action was excellent, the storyline was superb and the emotion that runs through the entire film was very gripping. To avoid saying too much, I will simply say that Nolan delivers big time on The Dark Knight Rises. He had a vision for the trilogy and followed through.

             Nolan’s vision was simple: make Batman believable. He created a solid story centered on the grittier, more down-to-earth interpretations provided by Frank Miller’s graphic novels Batman:Year One and The Dark Knight Returns. In my opinion, Batman is the realest and most believable character in all of comics. Batman’s story and power comes from one simple question: why? Why does Bruce Wayne do this? Superman is a demi-god from an alien planet trying to fit in with humans while simultaneously saving them from their own destruction. Spiderman was bitten by a radioactive spider and was reminded by his Uncle Ben that “with great power comes great responsibility”. Most superheroes, by definition, have some sort of superpower that drives them to do what they do. But Batman has no superpowers. No radioactive spiders, no mutation, no powers imbued by Earth’s yellow sun. So why does he do it? What drives him? One reason and one reason only: he can’t let go. He experienced a terrible tragedy as a child and it forever defines him. It was said that when his parents died Bruce Wayne ceased to exist and Batman became his true identity. The psychological depth of the character, his supporting casts, and even his canon of villains is unparalleled by any other comic book character or storyline. The Dark Knight Rises brings all of this out in epic fashion, cementing Batman as one of the most iconic characters of a generation.

To Be Fed?

            Well here it is folks! My first blog post! Let me start things off with a brief explanation of what this blog is intended to be. Essentially it is precisely what the blog name indicates. It will be a compilation of my thoughts on various issues: politics, religion and theology, sports, pop culture, entertainment, etc. For my first blog post I would like to focus on an issue of religion and spirituality.

            Today I attended an after-church, bring your own lunch board meeting at the church where I currently serve as Youth and Young Adult Pastor. The meeting was supposed to be a coming together to discuss issues related to the previous quarter’s Sabbath school lesson on witnessing and evangelism. There was one item on the agenda: how can we as a church facilitate church growth and evangelism? However, as can be expected, the discussion went terribly awry.

            People began to complain about their pet issues of what was going wrong in the church and why it isn’t growing. Blame fell on other churches, the youth department, dry worship services, forgetting the fundamentals, lack of commitment, and of course the pastors. I heard explanations of how young adults aren’t coming to church because they aren’t being “fed” which probably has some truth in it. However, I would like to raise one question tonight: Is that what we’re really here for? To be fed? Is that why we come to church? Is that why we drag people out of their beds at 8 o’clock on Sabbath morning, guilt them into coming to Sabbath School, and have them sit for 2 hours in a service? To be fed? I think this a gross distortion of what biblical worship is supposed to be.

            There are several requirements of biblical worship and none of them have to do with “style” or musical preference. For tonight's purposes I will mention only one of them. Biblical worship is about God and God alone. Nowhere in Scripture will one find anything saying that worship was designed to glorify, uplift, magnify, or edify humans. Throughout biblical history, the purpose of worship was to glorify, uplift, magnify and edify God.

            We see the earliest instances of worship with Cain and Abel in Genesis 4:3-5. Cain brings an offering to God which God does not accept, but He accepts Abel’s. The Bible does not specifically tell us why God rejected Cain’s offering and accepted Abel’s but it does give us a few clues. First, it says that “Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground” and Abel brought an offering “of the firstborn of his flock”. The text suggests that Cain just brought any fruit while Abel specifically brought the firstborn of his flock. This suggests that Abel’s offering was actually a “sacrifice” in the truest sense of the word. Abel brought the firstborn, the best of the flock. Cain just brought whatever he wanted and thought God would accept it. The point is that Abel’s worship was a sacrifice, and Cain’s worship self-motivated. Cain wanted to keep the first and best for himself.

          In the sanctuary service established by God in the tabernacle worship was all about God's intervention into human life and how He would ultimately reconnect us to Himself. David revolutionized Israel's worship life by providing music, poetry, and liturgy. The New Testament featured small, intimate, house-worships due to the underground beginnings of the church and the climate of persecution. So biblical worship is diverse, complex and multi-faceted. But it has one constant: It is always centered on God.

          How does this apply to our current understanding of worship? It tells us that worship is about God, who He is, and what He has done for us. Worship should never be motivated by self-interest. Paul tells us in Romans 12:1 that our “reasonable service of worship” is to present our bodies as “living sacrifices”. In essence, we come to church not primarily to get, but to give. We give ourselves to God! We come to worship and praise Him for who He is and what He has done. Any blessing we receive out of it is a by-product, not the end-goal. It is the same as returning tithe and offering. We return tithe and offering 1) because it belongs to God, 2) because we trust God to take care of us. We should not return it only because God has promised to bless us if we do. The blessing is a by-product, but not the reason. Until we get out of this mindset that worship is about us we will continue to fight and go round and round about worship styles, forms, traditional verses contemporary, drums verses no drums, and “black” worship verses “white” worship. Our focus is completely in the wrong place. Worship is about God not us. If we offer Him whatever we have with a sincere and open heart I believe that He will accept our worship and we will indeed be “fed”.

If there was any goodness or merit found here, that goodness and merit is from the Creator. If there were any flaws or errors, those were mine. Blessings