Michael Sweet/Stryper

Well, when you throw Bible out to the crowd, it's pretty hard to say you are not trying to be ministers of the gospel, but maybe they are trying to have it both ways, so as to avoid accountability.

Preacherman777 wrote:

Most of the bands that Stryper covered would not pass that test and I think that is harmful to their overall witness. Kind of like using pagan idols as a means to supposedly reach the lost. It just doesn't make sense to me. Now, having said that, this is just my opinion and I understand that many will disagree with me and I'm ok with that. It doesn't mean I think the guys in Stryper are evil or anything and I will still listen to and support them when they make music that does glorify God.

I am glad you addressed that fact that this is your opinion (and for some part I might agree). And I want you to know that my point is to argue with you (or try to take you to task). But some of what you have said seems rather contrary to me.

Preacherman777 wrote:

Now, as to your first question, what are some secular bands that I
listen to. Well, I don't mind most of the stuff from bands like Styx,
Journey or Boston, and I've been a fan of the music of The Monkees ever
since I was a kid.

I'm not sure if you know this or not but the name "Styx" is an ancient Greek name for the mythical river that seperates the earthly realm from hell. I'm not sure but enjoying music from a band that named themselves after a mythical river in hell might just hurt your witness (just kidding here......kind of).

Preacherman777 wrote:

That's true, many Christian bands have done that, but usually the songs
covered are songs that either have some kind of Christian message or
songs that could be taken that way in the right context. Rez is a really
good example. They covered Clapton's Presence of the Lord for obvious
reasons, but they also covered the Who's Bargain and Jefferson
Airplane's Somebody to Love, both of which could easily be applied to
one's relationship with God.

I agree that context is key, and with pretty much all of the songs on Stryper's covers album the songs can bring glory to God, or at the very least warn about that dangers of a lifestyle absent from God's will. To suggest that the "bands" that Stryper covered are somehow "bad to listen to" also applies to every single example you just used. Just for example: One of Eric Clapton's most popular songs glorifies the use of Cocaine...it is even called "Cocaine". The Who's drummer overdosed himself to death on drugs used to detox his alcohol abuse, and the Who's guitarist (a male) has claimed to have had sexual relationships with other men. The term "Jefferson Airplane" is a slang for a paper match stick split in two used to hold a joint (marijuana cigarette) so as not to burn your fingers. The band themselves is also not shy about their use of illegal drugs.
If we are fairly using the same criteria, then covering songs from any of those groups would be just as harmful to The Rez's witness as well. But I have never heard anyone claiming that members of The Rez band are anything less that God fearing Christians.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

I never claimed that the members of Stryper were anything less than God fearing Christians. I never claimed that Clapton or Jefferson Airplane or the Who for that matter are good examples, just that they made songs that could be taken in a Christian context. I would disagree that most of the songs on The Covering could be taken in a Christian context, but again, that's just my opinion and I respect the fact that you feel differently. Maybe you'd like to explain to me how these songs can be taken in that context. I'll admit that I may be more bothered by bands that have made use of occult or satanic imagery in their work than I am by ones who are just obvious sinners, so that may be a weakness on my side. I don't know. As for Styx, in spite of their name, I've never seen anything occult about the band or their music. In fact, Dennis Deyoung has written more than one song that seems to be pretty clearly God fearing in nature. If you've never heard his solo song "Hello God" you may want to give it a listen. But you know what, if I were to be convinced that any of these bands were stuff I really shouldn't listen to, again, it really wouldn't be a big deal for me to give it up. I'm more than happy with the music that clearly and openly glorifies God. I just give some slack to the stuff that I don't feel is really offensive to God or the Christian life. Heck, I even kept my silence when Deliverance did After Forever, in spite of it being a Black Sabbath song, just because of the nature of the song itself. I've really tried to give grace where it seems appropriate, but artists like Ozzy, Kiss, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Black Sabbath and so on, have been pretty offensive in my book and I think Stryper knew full well that covering bands like that would create a lot of controversy, in fact, I think they were counting on it as means to help push the album and spread the message that it's ok for Christians to be entertained by these bands. No matter what they sing about. I mean, let's be honest. I can go to You tube right now and find video of Oz Fox singing and playing AC/DC's Highway to Hell with a secular cover band. All this album really did is show us who these guys really are. Again, not that they are not Christians, but they are Christians who still love worldly music and they want to sing it and play it and now they can even promote it and tons of fellow Christians think that's great. It's compromise, plain and simple. I don't mind giving grace, I really don't, but I do think a person needs to draw the line somewhere.

Question to you, P777… where do you draw the line (as per your last sentence)?

For my part, I only regularly listen to one secular band, and that's a French prog rock band that my dad really likes.

Quote :

It's compromise, plain and simple.

While you have done a great job of stressing that your views are yours I hope you realize that this is also your opinion. I am sure your theological views play apart of this and that is great but my theological views dictate a different view...one that may or may not be held by stryper. In my views (and many others) musical/entertainment choices have nothing to do with salvation or the christian life. This is all I will say because I don't want to offend or break the rules but in short I am saying we each have our own views, our own theological ideas and are responsible for only ourselves. Let us all be reminded that this is a touchy issue and we should all agree to disagree....Romans 14 addresses this and simply says we can disagree on many issues (including this one) but we are all still brothers and sisters and we shouldn't go after each other. As for me personally I really don't care what the songs are about..if it rocks and I like it I will buy it.

Brokentulsa, the only thing I can say in response is that I do not believe this is a salvation issue and I'm pretty sure I have stressed that several times over the course of this discussion.

DBF, where I draw the line is that I don't want to feel like the things I'm listening to are glorifying sinful living or the occult. And as much as it has pained me to do so, because I was a huge fan, this is exactly why I put the brakes on my addiction to Van Halen. But I'm ok with that decision and I think it has been good for me. I want the music to be God honoring or least pretty much neutral. With some bands who don't offend my sensibilities too much, I'll pick and choose from what they do, but from other bands that just really rub me the wrong the way as a Christian, I just stay away completely.

I also want to stress on this issue that I understand we are all imperfect and we all have our struggles with worldly things and I am no exception. However, I think it can move into another area when we defend those things which are offensive. We are called to be in the world but not of it. We are not to love the world or things of the world. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy anything this world has to offer, but whatever affections for anything of the world should seem like hate in comparison to our love for God and that's why for me, the world of secular music gets only a small fraction of my affections.

Huh, that's kind of my dad's story. His favourite song was Running With The Devil, and when he became a Christian he went "Wait a minute…" and promptly ordered some Chick Tracks as a measure of repentance.

(that last part is probably not true )

[quote="Staybrite"]

Preacherman777 wrote:

I am glad you addressed that fact that this is your opinion (and for some part I might agree). And I want you to know that my point is to argue with you (or try to take you to task).

Darn, sorry I meant to say that my point was NOT to argue....

Preacherman777 wrote:

...I've really tried to give grace where it seems appropriate, but artists like Ozzy, Kiss, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Black Sabbath and so on, have been pretty offensive in my book and I think Stryper knew full well that covering bands like that would create a lot of controversy, in fact, I think they were counting on it as means to help push the album and spread the message that it's ok for Christians to be entertained by these bands...

I don't know about you but I have found myself certain that I understood someone else's intentions just to turn around and find out I was completely wrong. If Stryper didn't specifically claim that they hoped to create a lot of controversy...then Im willing to put the best spin on the situation and assume they didn't.

I'm sorry but It still looks to me like you trying to hold Stryper to a criteria that you are not willing to hold Rez and other bands to as well. But I'm going to drop this because I dont want to give the impression that Im trying to be argumentative (also im trying to do all this with my phone and have messed up at least once...probably more).
Peace to you PM777, and please know that on some level I actually agree with you.

Quote :

Darn, sorry I meant to say that my point was NOT to argue....

No problem, I figured that was probably what you meant.

I hear what you are saying and I understand, but I feel Stryper has gone far beyond anything I've seen a band like Rez do. I'd be really shocked if I saw a member of Rez or Petra singing Highway to Hell in a secular band as a side gig, but for some reason, the fact that Oz does that doesn't shock me too much and it probably wouldn't shock me too much if any of the other members of Stryper did it either. I just have the impression that they love this kind of music and have convinced themselves, not only that there is nothing wrong with it, but that it's ok to honor it and promote it. This is just the impression I've been left with and if someday I find out I was wrong about all this or if when I get to Heaven God tells me I blew it on this one, that's ok. I'm human and I can only do the best I can with the what I have understood about God's Word. I'm sure some people feel I'm being very judgmental, but again, I'm not judging their salvation or even that they've done a lot of good for the gospel. I just think they were wrong on this one.

Convinced themselves? "Sigh"....

Pm777..what did you think about against the law? Michael singing for boston? Do they still throw bibles out at shows?

Throwing Bibles out at shows doesn't guarantee their salvation. Whitesnake has a song that says "Lord I pray you'll give me strength to carry on.." but that doesn't mean their Christians.

Christians can be judged by their fruit. Has Stryper produced good fruit or bad?

The only point I was trying to make about them throwing Bibles out at concerts was that they had in fact tried to tried to do some form of ministry, so there is no out in saying they never meant to be a Christian band. But, no, I do not think that throwing out Bibles to the audience means they are necessarily Christian, but I am not attempting to judge whether or not they are Christians. I do believe that they are.

Brokentulsa, the guys have admitted that they were going through a bad time spiritually during the Against the Law album and if you watch interviews with them from back at that time, it was being announced that they had gone secular and they were agreeing with that. None the less, I don't think the album is all that bad, there are still songs on there with good messages and there is no question that album was some of their best work musically. I will say that I was sad to see them go through that time and they were clearly in a time of rebellion there, but again, It think they came to recognize that, so that's good.

As for Mike singing for Boston, well, I've already stated that Boston is a band that I listen to some of their stuff and I don't think I ever heard Mike sing the songs that were about partying, but maybe I just missed them. Anyway, I will also say that while Boston is certainly not Christian, I do think they have grown up from the party music of their early days and pretty much all their music since the Third Stage album has kept things pretty positive and clean for the most part. So, no, his singing for them did not bother me all that much, neither did Stryper's cover of "Peace of Mind" bother me.

I will be the first to admit that I make personal judgement calls on this stuff and I realize that other people do that as well, and some people's judgment calls are going to be different than mine and allow for more than I do in their secular music. That's ok with me. I'm not looking to judge anyone or say that anyone here is a bad Christian because they give more room than I do. This is just me and my opinion and I am far from perfect, but again, I'm just trying to do the best I can with how I handle the Word of God.

I was just reading an interview with Michael done last year (2011) while on tour in Europe...Here is an answer that I think will clear up their position...

"
Metalshrine: Comparing the U.S. to Sweden, we’re not
a very religious country and the U.S. is, but is there a difference
touring in different states in the U.S.? Do you still get criticism in
places these days?
Michael: We get some
criticism. Back in the day we got a lot more, but I guess people are
much more open-minded now. I remember back in the day, many times we
would go to perform a show and we would be ridiculed, totally! We
performed in Holland and we got booed off the stage for the first three
songs and they were chanting and this crowd wanted to kill us, you know.
But once we played, after three or four songs, we won the crowd over
and I think what it is, is once people see STRYPER,
they realize that “these guys are just a rock band and they’re not too
bad at it.” We’re not about religion. We don’t endorse religion. We just
endorse God and we endorse the word of God. We don’t endorse religion.
Religion, unfortunately, separates people and confuses people, you know.
We’re not a religious band.'


(Here is the whole interview...this is from a secular metal site...)
http://www.metal4all.com/stryper-we-dont-endorse-religion-we-just-endorse-god-and-we-endorse-the-word-of-god/

I kinda see stryper coming from the same thinking as Rob Rock or even Holy Soldier...I emailed both of those artist and they told me the same things Michael says in the interview I posted... and both bands shared that they listen to and perform secular metal daily.

Well, I'm not about religion either. I'm about following Jesus and living by His Word, so I'm not really sure this has to do with I've been talking about.

brokentulsa wrote:

This debate has been going on since strypers first album. I never saw stryper as a "christian" band but as a metal band with christians in it. Michael recently echoed that on " that metal show". He said they were just a glam band singing their message and views. Good for him. I thought the covering was a fantastic album..of course I like secular metal and listen to and buy tons of it. I don't think christians have to listen to music that is only christian and I don't think musicians have to only play christian metal. I believe we are free to live as we want. Some disagree and that's cool. Romans 14 says we are all brothers and sisters and can disagree.

I personally think its not good for him. I personally only listen to Christain Rock and Metal. I became a new creation in Christ in 1998 and from that time forward I have choosen to only listen to Rock Music with a Gospel message that uplifts, Glorifies and Honors God. God does give us free will but I'm compelled to live a life that pleases Him.

ishmael81 wrote:

I see both sides of it, I guess. I read an interview with Michael and he said that the reason they listen to that kind of music is because in the late 70's, there weren't really Christian bands palying that style. At the same time, it makes one think that Stryper listens to none of their brothers and sisters that play Christian music. I mean, who wouldn't have loved to hear them cover Saint's Plan II or Sacred Warrior's Stay Away From Evil or Barren Cross's In the Eye of the Fire or...

Back then maybe yes but theres no excuse now. There are many many Christain Rock, Hard Rock, and Metal bands out there for many many years now. Would be nice if they did it now...

Preacherman777 wrote:

I'm not a Christian music only kind of guy, but I am pretty particular about what secular music I listen to. Still, as a Christian artist, I wouldn't cover secular music unless it's pretty darn clean, has a Christian applicable message and preferably comes from a band that doesn't have a reputation for producing music that is very offensive to the Christian life. Most of the bands that Stryper covered would not pass that test and I think that is harmful to their overall witness. Kind of like using pagan idols as a means to supposedly reach the lost. It just doesn't make sense to me. Now, having said that, this is just my opinion and I understand that many will disagree with me and I'm ok with that. It doesn't mean I think the guys in Stryper are evil or anything and I will still listen to and support them when they make music that does glorify God.

I completely agree with you. I just happen to be an only Christain Rock, Hard Rock and Metal listener. Just my preference is all

danielbandfan wrote:

My mom didn't let me get The Covering because of the secular (EEEEEVIL!!11!!) music on there… that may have been a good decision, maybe not. Either way, I might get the new Stryper album.

I no longer support stryper. I stopped supporting right around the time Reborn came out..

alldatndensum wrote:

I am more in the boat that I would have just rather had a Stryper album with new songs instead of cover tunes of anyone else. That's my biggest complaint.

As for them doing a secular cover tune album, I don't see a problem. In fact, this might help them be heard by more non-Christians who would then pick up their other albums and hear the gospel. The only way this hurts Stryper at all is with "fans" trying to find fault with what they are doing anyway.

I completely disagree but thats ok brother...

Preacherman777 wrote:

I don't think so. I have no reason to want to find fault with Stryper. They've been one of my favorite bands since I was a teenager. I would just much rather see them using their God given talents to glorify God rather than the world.

I completely agree with you.

Preacherman777 wrote:

Well, I respect the question and the fact that some might think that could be the case, but for me and my studies of the Bible, I just don't see God doing that. Again, it would be like God telling one of his prophets to go out and sell pagan idols to people as an opening for them to listen to him. The Word of God is more than sufficient for the sake of the gospel and we don't need to be imitators of the world to try and make the gospel more attractive. It's one thing to speak to them in their language (metal) but it's quite another to glorify the ungodly in the process. What have darkness and light to do with one another? Come out from among them, that's what it says.

Again I completely agree with you