Hip-Hop Discipleship

Approximately a month ago, a significant event in the Hip-Hop nation took place. J. Cole released his highly anticipated album Born Sinner on June 25. On the album there was a track that stood out to listeners everywhere, namely "Let Nas Down". On it, Cole raps about veteran rapper Nasir Jones being one of his idols and how they first met. At their first meeting, Nas informed the up and coming rapper about how he was a fan and that he was the heir apparent. Nas has been the vanguard of political and social conscious Hip-Hop, while simultaneously enjoying mainstream success, for almost 20 years. Nas was signifying to Cole that he believes he could carry on that legacy.

 J. Cole then describes how he succumbed to the pressures of his record label which was pushing him to produce a hit single. Cole did respond to the pressure and released the biggest hit of his career, "Work Out". Soon after the release of the single, word got to Cole that Nas hated it. Why would he release such a mainstream single that gave in to pop-sensibilities? Cole laments on the track that he "let Nas down". But what happened next is a thing of beauty.

About a week after the release of J.Cole's album, Nas released a remix to the "Let Nas Down" track. On the track Nas explains to Cole that he understands the pressures that record labels bring on artists and that he was only trying to explain to him that he must rise above the fray of popular opinion in order to sustain good and meaningful art. Nas affirms the young emcee and tells him that he, in fact, "made Nas proud". This is a beautiful moment in Hip-Hop and I believe it gives us insight into discipleship in the church.

I have been reflecting a lot recently on the idea of discipleship. I have been reading on the concept of personal discipleship and following Christ on an individual basis, but also the idea of communal discipleship. In other words, how do I as a spiritual leader foster and encourage spiritual growth and development in my church? One of the key ideas I have come across over and over again in my reading is the idea of mentoring or apprenticeship. Taking what you have learned and experienced and passing it on to someone else. This is central in Hip-Hop culture!

Once an artist has risen to prominence, it is an unwritten rule that that artist seek out and build up other artists. For example, Dr. Dre "discovered" and developed rapper Eminem. Once Eminem rose to fame he discovered Queens rapper 50 Cent who developed artists like Lloyd Banks and Young Buck. In this cycle, you have four generations of artists that are engaged in relationship and work together. They learn from each other and sharpen one another as artists and hopefully as people.

What if the church had such a concept of discipleship? Everybody is being discipled while they are in turn discipling someone else. It should be a never-ending cycle that keeps on producing new fruit. What if as soon as you become a Christian (or Adventist) you are expected to find someone else to bring into the fold? We allegedly believe this but few practice it. It has not become a core value in our church culture. If the work is to continue and churches are to grow, perhaps we could all take a page from Hip-Hop discipleship.

Adventists and "The Bible" Series

          

          Last night as my wife and I were watching the latest episode of The Bible mini-series on the History Channel, she said something to me that was quite profound. She noted that even though she follows many Christians on Twitter, it was only the Adventists that were being overly critical. Hardly any of them had anything positive to say about the series. I noted the same thing on my timeline. Personally, I enjoyed the second episode more than the first because there was more action. I did have issue with the Samson scene with the jawbone only because I thought it could have been more epic, but the scene of him in the temple made up for that. But this raised a pressing question in both of our minds: what is wrong with us (Adventists)? Why can’t we just enjoy things? Are we the self-appointed “factual purity police”? I want to briefly address Adventism as it relates to our biblical criticism and the influence we have as Christians.

            As I said earlier, I have enjoyed The Bible series so far. My only beef with the first episode was that it was a little slow and slightly boring with the exception of a few parts. Last night’s episode was much more entertaining just as far as the action and drama were concerned. Are there some inaccuracies? Yes. Are there some embellishments? Yes. Do they take dramatic license? Yes. Are people watching it?! YES! Are Atheists and adherents of other religions entering a social media dialogue with Christians? YES!! Is there a possibility that people will be drawn to Christ as a result of this series! YES!! Then what is our problem?!?!? Many critics out there feel it is their responsibility to uphold the factual integrity of the Scripture, and that’s ok I suppose…but when our voice is dominantly critical then I believe there’s a problem.

            I learned a lesson several years ago while studying theology at Oakwood University. Young theology majors that are just being exposed to proper study methods of the Bible easily get lost and caught up in the game of pulpit criticism. Every preacher that dared to stand behind that pulpit was under doctrinal, biblical, and factual scrutiny. I was not exempt from this phenomenon. One week for chapel a guest speaker preached and was well received by the student body. Many people gained a real and genuine blessing from what he presented. When I went to lunch I sat with some friends who were raving up and down about how blessed they were by the sermon. I then proceeded to break down all of the errors in the sermon…all the places where he was exegetically inaccurate and where I thought he was stretching the text to make his point. I immediately sensed that I single-handedly brought a cloud over the whole table. The blessing that everybody was raving about receiving was gone. I robbed them of it. I learned after that incident that everything doesn’t need to be critiqued. I learned that my voice did, in fact, have influence and that I had the ability to literally rob people of a genuine blessing they may have received from God.

            If there is blatant doctrinal or theological error then as a pastor I do have the responsibility to address it. But some things just aren’t that big of a deal...for instance, in the first episode, Sarah ran to meet Abraham and Isaac after she figured out what was happening. Now the Bible says that the journey was 3 days to Mt Moriah, so factually she wouldn’t have been able to do that. Ok, small error. Does it matter to the spirit of the story or did it detract from the message of the text? NO! So who cares!?!

            My concern is that all of us Adventists will be mindful of whatever influence we may have in the larger community. This series provides us with a wonderful opportunity to engage people in conversation about the Bible and about JESUS in particular! Let’s not miss that opportunity because of a few factual missteps! Let us not rob people’s blessings by our incessant criticisms! Christianity is not going to crumble because you failed to point out that there weren’t angel ninjas in Sodom…just enjoy that ride and PRAY that God will use this series to bring people to Him. THAT is the point of the series.

Shalom

Thoughts on Spiritual Growth

As the sun sets this Friday night I find myself reflecting on issues of spiritual growth. I sometimes feel that my spirituality isn’t on the level of a “good” Christian, much less a pastor. If spiritual growth is just regular devotion and a regularly scheduled prayer life then along the spiritual babe-mature Christian timeline I fall somewhere around the toddler range. I feel like I should be so much further along. By now I should be hearing the audible voice or “leading” of God telling me what to do and where to go. That’s how pastors and spiritual mystics describe their experiences. “I felt impressed to go to this place…” or “I was led to talk to this person…”. These are common phrases uttered by the “spiritual” person. While I can honestly say there are a few instances where I feel I had those types of experiences (i.e. meeting and marrying my wife), I cannnot say it has been a part of my daily experience.

 Is that all there is to the spiritual life? Devotions, prayer, regular church attendance? If so, then I fear most professed Christians are destined to walk a long empty road. But I have come to the realization in the last few years that true spirituality is shaped in everyday life through everyday experiences. Is not spending time with and loving your wife or husband a spiritual experience? Isn’t interacting with neighbors and coworkers sometimes a test in spiritual strength? For those with children, aren’t sacrificing 15 minutes of morning devotional time in order to fulfill the ministry of preparing your kid’s lunch or being present for their extracurricular activities acts of “devotion” in themselves?

The point is, God does not make us “spiritual” because of routine devotional exercises. We are made holy by our daily ins and outs, by our daily interactions with people. We grow through experiences and through hardships. We learn through mistakes and failures. Spirituality is the process of living. For those in Christ, who place their belief and trust in Him, just keep on living and spiritual growth will take place.

Shalom

The Death of Hip-Hop

            I’ve found that in recent years I have almost completely lost all interest in Hip-Hop. It used to speak to me, my feelings, my emotions. There was hardly anything as therapeutic as blasting a certain artist or song and venting through my iPod, my CD player or (many moons ago) my walkman. Rap music used to be that friend that understood me when no one else did. When Tupac bellowed “Me Against the World” it connected with the soul in a powerful way. When Mos Def and Talib Kweli proclaimed what it meant to be “Black Stars” it gave a sense of pride and healthy militancy. Even when Eminem started delving into his crazy, angry, vindictive rants it connected with people from the “other side of the tracks” as it were.

 

 

          
 

             But what has Hip-Hop done for me lately? What has Hip-Hop done for any of us lately? For the most part, the answer is absolutely nothing. Sure, there are gleams of light here and there, but in general, Hip-Hop has indeed lost its soul. Every song on the radio is replete with sexuality and materialism and nothing else. Beats and production are better than ever, but lyrical content is worse and shallower than ever. And I’m not the only one who feels like this.

            Sales are reflecting this truth. The decline began to take place after the turn of the millennium. Many consider the late 80’s to mid-90’s the “Golden Age” of Hip-Hop because of emphasis on social issues and lyrical versatility. But after the turn of the millennium, the music began to focus more on “bling” than brotherhood; more on posturing than on politics. The numbers show that rap sales have declined 44% since 2000 and have gone from 13% of worldwide sales to 10%. Ironically, this was all prophesied by one of hip-hop’s most eloquent sages and veterans, Nas.

 

            In 2006, Nas released his highly controversial album Hip Hop is Dead. In that year, only 2 rap artists went “platinum” (selling over 1 million albums and a source of great braggadocio within Hip-Hop culture) and 14 went “gold” (selling more than 500,000). The next year, the quality and content of the music continued to decline as did the sales. Nas’ eerily prophetic omen had come true. Hip-Hop had lost its mojo and, in my estimation, still has not gotten it back.

            What does all this mean for the future of this art form? It means that if Hip-Hop is going to survive it must change. The creativity must come back; the lyrical dexterity and poetic genius must return. Artists like Lupe Fiasco, Kendrick Lamar and Wale still hold promise for this next generation. While I agree that Hip-Hop is indeed dead, it must not remain dead. Everything must die in order to return to life in a new and fresh way. Hip-Hop must continue to speak for generations to come. Hopefully it can once again be music that speaks to our minds and our souls.

Shalom

Preaching to the Choir

 

            Da Truth is back! He has just released his newest album, Love, Hope & War. I’ve listened through the whole thing and am hard pressed to find a song I don’t like! It’s a very well put together album with solid production and great beats. It stays true to its topic with every song falling under one of the three title categories, love, hope or war.

            What is interesting and unique about this album is that it is markedly different from other recent releases in “Christian” hip hop. Some of my previous posts have been about Christian rappers that no longer wish their music to be labeled “Christian”. These rappers, like Lecrae and Sho Baraka prefer that people think of them as rappers that happen to be Christian rather than “Christian” rappers. Artists like Lecrae and Sho Baraka have decided to give their music a more evangelistic thrust. They make music specifically for the unchurched.

            Da Truth, on the other hand, takes a very different approach. He WANTS to be called a Christian rapper. For him, this title is very essential to who he is, and the music that he makes. Truth has made no qualms about the fact that his music is specifically for the church. But is there a place for this in Christian hip hop? From its inception, Christian rap has been overwhelmingly “street-focused”. It was meant to be an outreach tool to those hip hop heads that wouldn’t go into church or listen to a traditional gospel song. Da Truth, however, believes that there’s also a place for in-reach in Christian hip hop.

            So the question is what is the purpose of Christian music? Is it supposed to be primarily evangelistic, or is there a place for Christian music made just for Christians? Parenthetically, pastors are faced with the same dilemma. We are caught between the realm of shepherd and evangelist. Which is primary? There are voices that would argue for one over the other and voices that would say they are both equal callings. I tend to agree with the later. Da Truth cites the Apostle Paul as an example. He was the missionary of missionaries. He was the “apostle to the Gentiles”. He helped spread the gospel message from Jerusalem and nearly to Spain. However, he is also attributed to have written 70% of the New Testament and his letters were undoubtedly pastoral. He was very much concerned with the well-being of the churches he established and Christianity as a whole.

            With this in mind, I believe one can be both. I think that Da Truth can make music specifically for the church and it still have evangelistic components. I think Truth’s stance is also important. In this day and age it is important for Christians to be vocal about what they believe and who they are, and I don’t believe that this stance is in opposition to Lecrae’s. I believe they can coexist. If Lecrae wants to make music that is more palatable to the secular world and has a more evangelistic focus then he should be able to do that, but he should not insist that everybody take that stance. In the same token, if Truth believes his calling is to directly address the church then so be it! But neither should he enforce this stance on others. The key idea is Christian freedom. There is room for both focuses in Christianity and in hip hop. We should be open enough to embrace both without pitting them against the other.

Shalom

 

Has King’s Dream Been Realized?

 

            Today is being celebrated nation-wide as Martin Luther King Day, and in a coincidence of history, it is also the day that America’s first black president is being sworn in for his 2^nd term. In another coincidence of history, this year is also the 50^th anniversary of the March on Washington where Dr King made his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. Many assert that the fact that we have a ‘President’ Barack Obama shows that King’s dream has indeed come to pass. In some respects I agree, but in others I’m not so sure. I will take some of King’s statements from the speech and explore whether his “dream” has been fulfilled or whether we still have work to do.

            Dr King’s dream was one of liberty, equality, and inclusion of African-Americans in all aspects of society. He dreamed of a society in which everyone would have equal opportunities. It could be argued that in lieu of President Obama’s 2^nd inauguration today that has been fulfilled. But it is a strange irony that in the same era of America’s first black president the poverty rate is higher than ever and is led by African-Americans. 50 million Americans are declared to be under the poverty line with over 60% of those being black. 27% of all blacks in the country are under the poverty line. Is this because 27% have not applied themselves? Are these statistics to be blamed solely on individual responsibility (or the lack thereof), or are there still structural and governmental elements that play a factor? I believe it is partially both, but there are undoubtedly structural elements in place that have perpetuated this cycle. Poverty itself is a cycle that once caught in, is very difficult to escape. Is there equal opportunity? Perhaps. But are there still things that we as a nation need to work on, indeed.

             In the final section of King’s speech which began the series of improvised “I have a dream” runs, King states, “I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.” So the question is, is there a sense of true brotherhood between races today? Undoubtedly, it is MUCH better than it was 60 years ago, but in the world I live in, things are still very much separate. King was also famous for saying that “the most segregated hour in America was 11 o’clock on Sunday morning”. As a pastor, this statement most certainly still remains true. In the same religion, in the same denomination, we are still unable to worship together. There are many factors that contribute to this and there is blame on both sides. But it still seems to be the case that even Christians of the same belief system and denomination can’t exhibit “brotherhood”. How much more does this apply to society at large?

            Another aspect of King’s “dream” was that “one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.” I recently visited the school associated with my church to do their weekly assembly. They showed the children a video about Dr King and the dream that he had. As I sat there and listened to the above statement I thought to myself, “Most of these kids have probably not even met other white kids; much less have friendships with them”. The school, like our church, is historically black. Many of the kids come right from the immediate Southeast D.C. area which is also predominately black. If these kids remain in the area through high school, chances are that they will go to a dominantly black high school due to district restrictions. When they come to church they see only black faces in their classes and in the pews. Perhaps when they go to college they will be exposed to other races and ethnicities, but that’s still a long way off. In my opinion, while these kids will not have to live through a segregated world, they most definitely live in a separated world.

            Some would argue that this is a good thing, but is it in line with what King dreamed? King’s dream was one where everybody not only lived together in peace, but lived together as brothers and sisters; one where we could celebrate unity in diversity. That dream has yet to be realized, even in the church. Especially in the church! If there is one place that this “dream” should be a reality it should be in our congregations, for it was Christ’s dream as well. Jesus prayed for the church that we would be “one” as He and the Father are one. This doesn’t mean that everybody is the same, but it should at least mean that we be together more than once every 5 years at a General Conference session.

            So my answer to the question of whether Martin Luther King’s dream has been realized is yes and no. In some ways it has, in some ways it hasn’t. We still have work to do to heal wounds, put aside prejudices and stereotypes and fight the good fight for equality and justice.

Shalom

How Far Can Christian Art Go and Still Be Christian?

            About two years ago, Christian rapper Sho Baraka announced that he was leaving Lecrae’s high-profile label, Reach Records. He did so because he claimed that he felt artistically restricted. Indeed, Reach Records is one of the premiere Christian rap labels in the nation, and has a reputation for its “unashamed” stance for Christ. Because of this, Reach, like many other Christian rap artists and labels has a tendency to sound the same. Every album sounds the same. Every artist deals with exactly the same subjects: worship, rebuke to hip hop culture, a song to show a promiscuous girl her worth, etc. Every cd drags on repetitively and boringly. Sho felt like he wanted more artistic control. He was determined to deal with subjects that are considered taboo in the Christian community, like racism, poverty, economic disparity, etc. So he split.

 

            Fast forward two years to this past Tuesday when Sho released his third solo album Talented 10^th. It is a concept album based on an article by W.E.B. DuBois that asserted that it will take 1 out of 10 blacks to get a quality education for the race to excel. He deals with precisely those subjects that were denied him before. The most prominent and poignant of those subjects is racism. Sho deals with it on his highly controversial song “Jim Crow”. In the song Sho repeatedly uses the word “nigga” and even throws a “b***h” in the 3^rd verse. However, the later was used in the context of a rebuke to rappers that use it, not in a glorification of it. Regardless of the context of the song and the context of the verse, this song has produced much controversy, leading to the main question of the hour: “How far can Christian art go and still be Christian? I will approach the question from two perspectives: first from the perspective of an artist, and then as a Christian.

            An artist’s job is self-expression. Whether they are a rapper, musician, poet, or a painter they draw from life experiences, feelings, and emotions to create. One of the most frustrating thing for an artist is to be pigeonholed and censored. For an artist to be told “you can’t write this” or “you can’t say that” is to kill inspiration. Truth be told, musicians and rappers/poets are the only artists that “the church” demands must produce purely “Christian art”. I’ve never heard anyone chastise a painter for painting “non-Christian” portraits. Nor have I heard of anyone demanding someone who draws to only draw pictures of Christ. Why do we put this expectation on musicians?

            Why must musicians, above any other artist, be defined by their Christianity? I don’t believe it’s fair. Furthermore, the church still has a problem with this idea that something “Christian” is always neat, clean, and family-friendly. Let’s face it, if we put the same content limitations on the Bible itself as we put on musicians we would have a very small Bible. The Scriptures are full of R and X-Rated content. Rapes, murders, incest, illicit sexual affairs, prostitution, and countless other things are part of the biblical narrative. Is the Bible’s portrayal of such events glorification or description? I think we would all agree it is description. Therefore, what matters more than content is context. What is the context in which “questionable” material is presented should be the real question.

            So back to Sho Baraka’s dilemma; is Sho’s use of provocative content a renouncement of his “Christian” title? By no means! If those critics of the song “Jim Crow” would actually listen to the song and get a sense of the context in which both words are used I think they would understand a little better. Part of the problem is that the church has ordained musicians, poets and rappers as “ministers” simply because they use words when, in truth, they are simply artists. And even if they were ministers, that does not mean they must censor their content to meet Christian criteria. I wonder what the church would say about the prophet Isaiah walking around naked for 3 years (Isaiah 20:1-3). Sometimes the message God wishes to convey is messy and uncensored and we dare not reject it just because it makes us uncomfortable.

 

Shalom