An Apology to T&N and thoughts on controversy
In the latest issue (May/June) of HM there is an ad run by the indie punk band Knights of the New Crusade, which features a knight holding a decapitated head in his hand, and the victim's torso is sporting a t-shirt with a Tooth & Nail logo on it. I'm not sure why KOTNC chose to use this image in its ad, but as the editor and publisher of this magazine I should have stepped in and refused to run the ad as-is. [In our advertising contracts, we reserve the right to refuse any advertising for any reason] Against my better judgment, I did not exercise this power; and for this I apologize (to Tooth & Nail Records and its fans). It's not right to allow one company to tear another one down in the pages of a magazine that supports (as much as it covers) this scene.
What was I thinking when I ran the ad? This is a good question that was posed to me from my staff after I informed them about the ad. I was simply thinking, 'Boys will be boys.' I love pranks, and I love silly, off-the-wall humor (like Monty Python, who made a career out of knights and medieval times). While the "joke" was tacky and tactless, it seemed harmless enough. Another thing that made me hesitate from using my editorial control over the ad is that I have a distaste for policing and/or telling someone what they can or cannot advertise. I have not had to do this many times over the years, but there have been a few examples.
In the mid-90s I interviewed a band called Brother Cane (R.I.P.) in one of our "So & So Says" features. A record chain by the name of Camelot Records (a coincidence? yes, but slightly amusing) was running "gang" ads, where they would feature half a dozen or so album covers of titles that their stores carried. In the issue following the "Brother Cane Says" story, Camelot featured the band's self-titled debut album in their ad. I contacted the advertising/marketing person at Camelot and told them we had a problem running the ad with the Bro Cane artwork in it. This was especially difficult personally, because I really, really like that band; and the vocalist revealed a personal faith in Christ in the interview. However, the band was not what you'd call a "Christian band," so I informed that marketing person that we would get flak if we ran the ad, readers would not be served, nor would the stores, nor the company. "Besides, I suggested, they could simply sell that "spot" to another record label and "fix" the ad. They complied.
Very recently (just two days ago, in fact) a fairly large "secular" hardcore label informed us of their plans to run an ad in our next issue, and they let us know which bands would be featured in the ad (after we inquired as such). This label is not what you would call a "Christian record label." They have released a few albums by Christian bands, though, so some of their ads certainly fit perfectly in our magazine. They were confused about my comment to decline running their ad, as their publicity department had scheduled more than one interview with non-Christian bands (featured in our "So & So Says" section), so I explained the unique feature that we have in each issue and communicated what our identity and chief editorial focus is -- Christian hard music.
In today's musical climate, a very healthy thing is happening. This is something that we hoped to educate, inform, and support across the board for many years (and we rejoice that it's happening); but it presents its own unique problems as well. The good thing that's happening is more and more artists are realizing that art is good (not a wicked "tool of the flesh" that can only be redeemed if it's used for the Gospel) and that as believers these bands should endeavor to take their idea (their art, their message) to the "marketplace of ideas" (i.e. the mainstream music world). As more and more artists are following this model, they are pursuing excellence in art and glorifying God with it as they share their music with the world. Because there is some real talent and good art involved, many mainstream record companies are signing or licensing these albums and releasing them in "general market" stores.
Now, when we get a new album in the mail from a band we're not familiar with, we are challenged with the sometimes daunting task of determining whether this is art that reflects a Christian worldview or not. The same goes with advertising sometimes. If a label with some Christian and some non-Christian acts want to advertise, we think it best to steer them to market only their Christian bands in our magazine, and not the others. We are a niche magazine that covers a specialty genre or scene. While the scene is "growing up" and spreading beyond the four "walls" of the Christian music industry, it can get confusing on which bands are Christian and which aren't.
While it would be easy to focus on just the bands that are signed to Christian labels and no one else, we would be sadly missing out on some of the best art in the world, which is created by believers in Jesus. And when a band breaks into the general market, I know that many of our readers want to read about them and keep up with them. We choose to serve our readers in this way, even if it requires an elevated measure of discernment and thinking. God gave us brains to use and we have choices to make every day. As the publisher of HM Magazine, I choose to cover hard music with a (Christian) faith perspective -- whether that be on Word Records or Atlantic -- even though it brings with it these extra challenges.
NEXT PAGE
All Pages | 1 | 2
Return to Internet Exclusives
Comments
Wow. You have such an awesome way of explaining your point. You're a very gifted writer who's been around the block a time or two. Like I say over and over, you're a man of God too, and it shows in your response to this issue you're having to deal with.
The t-shirt could, and probably has, raised both kinds of reactions. It seems that it was done in good fun.
What about an apology from the band?
I appreciate the fact that you welcome bands outside the Christian realm. It speaks volumes to them without saying a word.
You're absolutely right - let's look at the big picture. Put things in perspective. HM magazine has been there for all of us through the years.
Let's not take a good thing for granted.
Doug,
Thanks for your awesome response. When I saw the ad I was very upset due to the graphic nature. I am a HUGE fan of Monty Python but I guess with the conflict between the Knights and Christian from Anberlin (who are T&N) I thought of it as a slap in the face and not a nudge-nudge-wink-wink. However, it took great courage to explain your side of the issue, and I really think you helped ease a lot of my concerns. If you are ever near the Philly are you have a prayer partner in me.
PS-The new issue is great!
God be with and your incredible staff!
PJ
Great response. I think it is good for people to remember that you are a niche magazine. The image that came to mind as you were describing those "gang" ads was the reaction that Metal Edge fans might have to some record label having an ad with metal bands and Spice Girl-wanna bes in their magazine. They would freak! I think the Knights ad was a jab that was covered up with humor. That way, if some gets mad, they could just say something manipulative like "Gee, it was just a joke, get over it!" Yeah, on the surface it was just a joke, maybe even intended to be in good fun, but there is some underlying attacks in it. But, the letter from the guy from Anberlin had some jabs in it, too. I tend to agree with the Anberlin letter (minus the jabs) more than the Knights (and even their responses to that letter). Thanks, Doug, for stepping in. You are right - "boys will be boys."
Despite my disdain for this band and their chosen form of advertising, I admire Doug for not censoring his magazine to death.
Doug,
You should charge the band triple the ad rate for all the extra value they have received from all of this traffic!
Should of thought of that before this mess.
I just plain don't understand the ad at all. the head looks like it's supposed to be a devil with some kind of hat(?)but it's not like you can get rid of demons that easily.
I think the “Knights of the New Crusades” band name is tasteless, just as the Anberlin singer stated in his letter. I think he overreacted to the first ad, perhaps, because the initial ad really wasn’t /that/ bad. It was disrespectful, to be sure, and I certainly wouldn’t advertise my band that way - but it wasn’t as heinous as Anberlin makes it out to be.
Now, the second ad with the beheading - THAT one I would consider heinous and awful and I disappointed that HM let it onto their pages. On the heels of a devastating war on terrorism where we saw frequent beheadings of innocents, we should NOT be glorifying that kind of behavior and certainly not by those of us who consider ourselves Christians. It may have been intended all in good fun, but it is terribly offensive - I have serious doubts as to the actual level of commitment those band members truly have to their professed Lord and Savior.
I think the band is a joke meant to poke fun at Christians. That is just my strong feeling towards the matter.
Hey, I agree with not being thought police and censoring ads BUT in my opinion this band has to go. This band has alot of growing up to do. Wether you like it or not, even the ads reflect the magazine. Crappy ads or cheesy ones WILL make people regard your magazine as such. It must be tough to turn away$$$ from ads. It is the basics of business but if people start dropping out then your circulation is hurt and the vicious ad cycle begins again.
This band sucks, their ads suck and you are only sooting yourself in the foot by dying on this hill.
I applaud you for your comments about why you ran the new Knights ad. I did not find it offensive, but I didn't make the connection between Anberlin and T&N until I read other comments. In hindsight it does seem as if the Knights were taking a jab at Anberlin. Maybe it's time for everyone to let this go and get on with exhibiting Jesus to a hurt and dying world. (Listen up bands, no more jabs!) Thanks for the awesome work you put into each issue of the magazine. My husband and I love each issue. Keep 'em coming!
OK SO THIS BAND HAS GOT TO GO EVRY1 AGREES IT SEEMS. SO HOW DO WE GET RID OF THEM? I'D STOP BUYING THEIR CDS BUT I NEVER BOUGHT ONE OF COURSE. SO WHAT DO WE DO? ANY SUGGESTIONS?
PS SAW AN ADVANCE SCREENING OF KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IT WAS AWESOME! THERE'S A LOT THE NIGHTS COULD LEARN FROM THIS MOVIE!
i'll stand by ya Doug. good apology.
"Crappy ads or cheesy ones WILL make people regard your magazine as such."
Are you for real?? Come on! It'd be a shame if HM had to include some ridiculous disclaimer stating that the views expressed in ADS are not necessarily those of the staff. But they don't need to do that b/c you already know that. Or you should.
The articles in HM speak for themselves. The music coverage is quality, therefore the mag is quality. Some people are taking these adverts way too seriously.
Well, people also should know that coffee is hot, but now we get those goofy warning labels on most cups of coffee, because, well, that's the way our society is....
But I totally agree. HM = quality. HM = rock. HM = METAL!!!!!!
I am opposed to the ad, plus the impression i get as far as this band's motives...
anyone got info on the anberlin letter? im curious to see background on this situation...
Terrible ad. Lame band. No integrity at all. They will dissappear soon.
I think the ad was in bad taste either way.
I agree with the person who said that with teh recent beheadings in Iraq we should have more respect as Americans and certainly as Christian Americans.
The Anberlin letter is printed in the internet exclusives area of this site, you have to look at the exhaustive liste, for "Anberlin's Stephen goes off". I agree mostly with the historical facts presented in the lettter. I also agree with Stephen's thoughts, even though he does get a little passionate about them and they probably are offensive to the people in Knights. Maybe they stray a little into attack mode. But I've seen a lot worse.
http://www.hmmagazine.com/exclusive/anberlins_stephen_goes_off200503/index.php
have fun w/ that one. it's a trip...
I cannot see why such an ad was run in the first place. I know that Doug explains his reasoning behind it, but it is just a total shame. A major part of my respect was lost for the entire magazine after the last few issues that featured ads from that band. First they started off talking about other religions, and now to have the kind of ad in this month's edition. Not only do they take a swing at the parent label of many forward thinking Christian bands, but they also take a stab at Muslims, with the Saddam look alike mask, to the display of a mock beheading that is suppose to spark anger over the multiple beheadings in Iraq at the hands of terrorists. It is things such as those that disturb me the most. There are several younger readers of this magazine who are having their minds shaped by several different influences. When they see this add, what are they going to think? In my opinion, running that ad in the magazine was just as bad as if it had been an ad from one of the many Neo-Nazi record labels out there. Same narrowminded mentality, brought out by extreme ignorance.
I'm just as guilty of mindlessly complaining about the mag, as if my life depended on HM being presented the way I see fit.
But if you've lost respect for it, it's only b/c you totally disregarded Doug's apology, an apology that wasn't all that necessary in the first place.
I'd say more respect is due, for having to put up w/ all this.
And it'd be interesting to know if T&N is in as much of an uproar...
While this apology is refreshing, the original ad should never have been published. The original responses to the 9/11 violence - responses which continue to shape U.S. foreign policy - were & continue to be voiced by a particularly harmful type of Christianity; a type that repeatedly drums the ponderous rhythm "If you're not with us you're against us, If you're not with us you're against us," & on & on. It is this thought-conditioning that appears to have influenced the band that submitted the ad. This band appears to have the image & identity not as a Christ-seeking or Christ-glorifying, employing instead the message that to murderously punish non-Christians is a faithful way to bring honour & praise to the Godhead, (the Trinity). That they would respond to Mr. Christian's letter, with an ad conveying an identity of being a "victim," suggests codependency on their part. In other words, they cannot take the heat so they set fire to the kitchen. (And when I speak of "victim mentality" & codependency, I speak from what I have learned from my own addiction-recovery experience. It takes one to know one.)
I openly ask HM to refuse any further ads from the band in question, & to compose & publish an in-depth, informative article about The Crusades, including why they were not about glorifying the Godhead. Thank you, Andy Spedden
thank you for clearing that up... i was very confused.
An open letter (Luke 12:2-3) to Doug Van Pelt, HM Magazine, its readers and Tooth and Nail Records from Mike Andrews of the Knights of the New Crusade:
I would like to apologize for the misunderstandings caused by our most recent ad in HM, which featured a knight decapitating the Devil; the friend who posed for the headless body of Satan happened to be wearing a Tooth and Nail t-shirt. From reaction to the ad, it seems that it was not clear to everyone that it was Satan being decapitated.
Depicting violence against demonic forces is nothing new, of course: it goes back beyond Demon Hunter and T Bone through numerous hymns to the very Gospels themselves, so I can make no apology for that. But I do most sincerely apologize that it was presented in a manner (specifically, black and white) that could be so easily misunderstood.
The second aspect of the misunderstanding is more complex: many of those who have realized that the violence against the devil, representing spiritual warfare, have asked why the devil would be wearing a Tooth and Nail shirt.
The answer is quite simple: the friend who posed as the body was wearing a T and N t shirt that day. As I do, he likes some of the bands on the label, which has always seemed an admirable example of balancing worldly business concerns and Christian ideals.
It wasn't until the ad ran that some people posited a connection between the Devil' seeming endorsemenet of T and N and my disagreements with Stephen Christian (who I love as a brother in Christ even though he thinks my band is too militant and I think his is too wishy-washy: I have disagreements with my biological siblings too). Even had there been reason to do so, there would have been no reasons to cast aspersions on T and N.
But everything happens for a reason, and my initial misgivings about the unintended message of the ad were soon confounded by e-mails decrying alleged policies and practices of T and N. Some of them encouraged us to "throw the moneychangers out of the table," something I'd never considered in terms of the CCM world.
Most of these were unsubstantiated rumors, but two were from members of bands that have had albums released on T and N who said they have been unable to publicly speak about their dealings owing to threatened lawsuits. They expressed support for what they perceived to be chastisement for T and N's lack of commitment to Christ.
After much prayer, I turned to my Bible and came to Matthew 6. The parable of the servant with two masters made my thoughts even mroe troubled.
Is Christ-based business a valid way of following Him? This is a long debated question and I don't claim to have the definitive answer, as there are passages of the Gospel that don't seem to contradict this notion, while others do so vehemently.
With that in mind, at this time I can only be sincere in apologizing to T and N for any distress caused by misinterpretation of the ad as a threat of physical violence against anyone: although God has called on us (and all other Christians) to be spiritual warriors, we are of course opposed to physical violence.
We very humbly apologize to Mr. Van Pelt and HM for any distress this has caused. We are sure that God will continue to Bless him for following his consciuence and we thank him for his support.
We apologize to any brothers and sisters in Christ who have been distressed by the ad or by our use of martial metaphor, but we will continue to look for those lost sheep, sinners like us but who, unlike us, haven't yet found God's grace, who we are able to witness to and save. We don't claim that our style is the only valid one, only that it's obtained results for us. And whatever the tree might look like to you, what matters is the fruit it bears.
We also thank all of those who have given us their kind and loving support.
Until He brings Justice to Victory,
Mike Andrews
Knights of the New Crusade
Finally! Thank you, Mr. Andrews, for setting the record straight. A calm answer to turn away wrath.
so is stephen going to picket the new movie about the crusades? that's what i want to know!
whatever, stephen, i am w/ you all the way on your crusade...oops
Thank you Doug, although as lauren stated, your apology wasn't altogether necessary. It is important to see all sides of an issue, and we should thank the Knights of the New Crusade for bringing us together to finally discuss our thoughts and feelings about the state of Christian music today. I've been reading this board for a long time but was never inspired to post until now. How nice to hear everyone's voice! But Stephen Anberlin, what do you mean we should get rid of this band? Heck, Jesus would befriend a challenger. What will it take? Remember, both bands are playing for the same reason. Maybe, you should take them on tour with you or something - then we could really see this community unite!
First of all it took guts to admit you made a mistake and for giving tooth & nail records an apology. I was very upset when I saw the ad, and was shocked to see something like this in your magazine. I think you should no longer allow Knights... to advertise in your magazine. This is a slap in the face to those who have lost family members in Iraq, from the extreme Muslims. Please do not let these guys ever run an advertisment in your magazine, even if they pay triple.
Knights Of The New Crusade FOREVER!!!!
We should all hope to have the peace and level-headedness of Mike Andrews of the Knights. I disagree with the T&N shirt being used in the ad but at least he has written such a wonderful apology. I've been a long time fan of Anberlin but I'm now starting to doubt their sincerity as Christians. Stephen has bashed the Knights for using warrior image as metaphor, and has suggested that we "get rid" of the Knights. True Christians should embrace each other, Stephen is obviously threatened by them! I find that the knights are emulating Christian values more than their aggressors. Most Christians don't like Punk Rock music so the knights are loosing fans there but I saw them in Anaheim and I was moved. They brought the word of god to some serious heathens and it took guts!! I talked with them after the show and I assure anyone with doubts of the knights' sincerity that they are indeed sincere!! God bless.
Well I'm one of those Chrıstıans who doesn't really lıke punk rock. Hard rock, metal, yes, but the whole punk attıtude has never seemed rıght to me. Maybe I'm just too old. I guess ıt's good that someone ıs usıng ıt to spread the Word, but ıt's just not for me.
Here's two cents from a Christian who likes to rant and rave and get up on his soap-box: the band made a mistake, but we all do, correct? if you disagree see *I believe* II John, "if you say you are without sin, you make a liar of God." anyway, i agree an apology really isnt necissary from Doug or HM. I do have a problem at some level with the way that the 'Christian Industry' works, see the article this magazine wrote on the issue for instance. and lets face it, if the boot was on the other foot T&N would be mad that we were questioning, right?
my second point is this, Knights of the New Crusades came out and made an appology, and that is worth more than anythinge else in my book. for anyone to comeback after they make a mistake and admit it and to apollagize is perfect.
Now, one final thing, in reponse to Stephen of Anberlin. to each his own, for you to say that the historical Crusades were bad is good, they where horrible blood-bathes. i disagree with the name and the image aswell, but removing them is drastic and hypocritical. everyone reading this, and myself, and everyone else, is a horrible sinner and makes mistakes, no one who would claim Christ can disagree. Read III John sometime if you really want to throw them out, John has nothing nice to say to people with that mindset, let God judge, and not try to play God and judge for him, huh? but the Knight is an image used in Scripture, for example the spiritual armour, and that and the Knights of the New Crusade are God's and He will work everything out, so chill.
the knights of the new crusade are a joke 'christian' band...
if they're serious...that's even worse.
Wow, as a graphic artsit who works with print ads I really cant see any publication accepting that ad, but I think Doug is right also in not censoring. I went to the Knights site just because I wanted to know what the crap they were and well, Doug I dont want to tell you how to do your job but please dont advertise cheese in a great magazine. Even if it does claim to be Christian it can still be crap.
Just my thoughts.
Digger, have you ever seen the KOTNC perform? Anyone that has would never accuse them of being a "joke". They are for real and if you read what they have written in all of these postings and on their website you'll see that they know the bible inside and out. I have not encountered the same level of scripture knowledge and faith from Anberlin; correct me if I'm wrong. How can you call them a "joke" when they so clearly and effortlessly talk of their faith and the Bible? AND BLESS CRYMSON PHEONIX for his/her obviously strong values and ethics, we could all learn something from that kind of attitude!
Is anyone else wondering how we were supposed to know that the mask on the beheaded head was meant to represent the Devil? To me it looks like a cross between Saddam and Super Mario. Would it have been too difficult to buy a devil mask instead of one that looks like a racial caricature? And if we're to assume that the victim is the devil, maybe you don't want him wearing a christian t-shirt. Just a thought. You might want to try one sometime.
It's too bad that all this controversy is giving these idiots more publicity, which makes me wonder if perhaps they're not as dumb as they seem.
"Just a thought, you mıght want to try one sometıme." And you want to poop on somebody 4 beıng unclear? It2s not real clear that's ıt's a devıl mask untıl I was told ıt was but then ıt made sense. But you say "one" after sayıng devıl mask so you seem to know ıt's one even ıf ıt's not that good a one.
The questıon ıs, IS IT a Chırtsıan tee? I don't know but ıt's worth thınkıng about.
And ıdıots ıs not a very Chrıstıan thıng to say, to me I thınk. Maybe somebody else would thınk you are an ıdıot: so who's to say what's rıght? Judgement lıke vengeance ıs not ours ıt ıs the Lord's. Please pray on that.
I just checked out their website, which I should have done before insulting them in my last post, and it appears that these guys are bonafide evangelists. While that gives me a bit more respect for them (a bit less disrespect might be more accurate, actually) it doesn't excuse the idiocy of their current ad or the extreme tastelessness of their moniker.
You might as well call yourselves "Stormtroppers of the New Holocaust", spiritualize it's context, and expect people to understand.
Kudos on trying to spread the gospel but I still think you're doing a disservice to our cause.
Stormtroopers of the New Holocaust... i love it! Somebody'll snatch that moniker up quick!
How about "priests of the new inquisition"?
I am not fan of any of the so-called Crusade, but to think that everyone on fighting on the Christian side was evil and that everything they did was like nazis or witchhunters is like saying that everyone that fought on the side of Islam was always 100% good. There were many awful things but many small but important flashes of humanity on both sides, as often in war the case. People need to read some history and not just get the latest version word of mouth before passing judgement on people of the past, otherwise maybe don't judge, especially if you don't really knnow what you talk about but just repeat what somebody told you. Anybody agree?
I just think it is a shame that war could be waged in the name of our Lord! I can't imagine anything more backwards. Of course many good people were suckered into the Crusades by the Church. Since the gospels were only permitted in Latin (and at least 90% of ppl were illiterate anyways so it wouldn't have changed much if scripture was available in the vernacular) the clergy could promote any anti-christian, self-serving doctrine they wanted. I'm sure our Lord, being the epitome of justice and fairness, will take that into account when judging his well-intentioned followers who spilled blood in His name.
With all the knowledge at are fingertips today, our generation won't be able to claim that same ignorance.
In other words Asavar, I agree with you that not everyone on the Christian side was evil intentionally. May God have mercy on their souls
With all the uproar over the two “Knights” ads, I am still more upset over Stephen’s (Anberlin) diatribe over the first “Knight” ad in the Letters to the Editor section. First, I’m appalled that Stephen would call the Christian knights and soldiers in the crusades, “murderers.” Their intent was to keep the land where Christ lived out of the hands of non-believers who would dishonor it. Highly admirable and honorable yet very misguided. Stephen said Christ taught peace, which is true, Christ says we are to love our enemies and neighbors. This statement tells us behaviors for man on a one on one basis. There is clearly another method spelled out in the Bible for the behaviors of nations towards each other. The oversimplified answer of ‘Christ taught love’ misguides people. That is why people see the Bible as having two gods, one god in the Old Testament who is angry and war-like and another god in the New Testament that teaches love. When in actuality God always taught love in both testaments towards each other yet God had a very pro-active attitude towards nations dealing with ungodly nations. The “knights” have every right to tease or poke fun of other religions. Elijah teased the prophets of Baal. Christ was sarcastic with the Pharisees. Clearly the religions portrayed in the ad with the trash can are those sending people to hell. What kind of respect should we give to religions sending billions to hell? Stephen knows less about theology than he does about history. I wouldn’t have minded an uneducated comment like Stephen’s if it actually came from a band that had no problem with singing about Christ and maybe actually mentions Jesus’ name in a song or two. (I believe their second album mention “lord” once) I’ve seen them live and they didn’t express their faith at any point in the concert either. I do at my job, it’s what Christ called us to do. Instead their first album could be summed up about chasing girls and partying. It’s this type of “lets party and chase women” attitude that give Christians a bad name (using the same words of Stephen). The world sees no difference between us and them by the lifestyle we sing about and live. I also feel obligated to mention that it is common knowledge that “Lovesong” by The Cure which they cover was a song by a man written about another man. Stephen needs to check the log in his eye before he goes after the speck in others.
Send your comments to
Jwilso73@tampabay.rr.com
well jeff, i think urs is the most sensical comment i've read yet concerning this. thanks for taking the time to share some fresh insight. i had forgotten bout that story of elijah and baal's prophets, but ur right, it's directly applicable to what the Knights have done.
So they're a Christian band with a sense of humor... that happened to make a mistake... thats no reason to ban them from having ads in HM.
what would be the reason for banning them(as a few people have suggested)?
To try to seperate them from the Christian community?
God knows seperation is just what The Body needs!
or would they be banned as some sort of punishment?
This band has to love those people that want them gone... isnt that punishment enough?
The whole knights and crusade thing is just a gimmick that obviously works for them... so they're running with it.
Umm...Did anyone notice that on the Knight of the new crusade site; the guies holding paper have the EXACT same hand writing?
http://crusadenow.com/index2.html
If you have ever talked to a Muslim before, you will find out that they take their religion very seriously, and this includes symbols of their religion, too. If a Muslim were to see the ad with symbols of their faith and the name of their god being thrown in the trash, he/she would be so offended that they would probably cause a riot. Hasn't the whole Newsweek thing taught us anything? I've been to the Middle East, and I have to say that we are lucky that no Muslims read hm, because they would see that ad as a desecration. Throwing the name of allah into a trash can would be a lot worse than throwing the qu'ran down a toilet.
Yes, as a Christian you should believe that all other religions are false. But if you want someone from that other religion to follow Jesus, then you have to show respect to their beliefs, or they will never listen. Respecting someone's beliefs doesn't mean that you agree with them. Ever heard of "respectfully disagreeing?" The ads by this band will not help people come to Jesus, and they are designed to do that. Despite what most Christians think, non-Christians don't sit around thinking "what should I do with my false beliefs?"
The whole issue of the crusades is a hard one, because God did send Israel to war in the OT. But we have to remember that God also said that He "desires that NONE should perish, but all would come to faith." So war is NEVER God's top desire to change another nation. Repentance and faith are what he wants most. We have to trust that He had other nations wiped out because he knew that the people in those nations were so hardened that they would have never repented. Muslims are coming to know Jesus by the thousands every year around the world, so I doubt it was ever God's desire to have the Crusades happen. I remember reading once about some missionaries in the Holy Land around the time of crusades that were seeing a lot of Muslims come to Jesus. They protested the crusades because they felt that God would bring revival to that land if only war wouldn't happen. That didn't go over too well with the church.
uhmm Squzh....what are you talking about? did you mean to write "guys" instead of guies, and no one is holding paper on that page you referenced. There is no "hand" writing on the site. There is typed writing, did you mean that the style and language used was the same? Because not even that was correct.
Sorry...eh; its under the photo section of the site. Forgive me for the grammical errors; at that time of posting; I was rather quite tired.
"But if you want someone from that other religion to follow Jesus, then you have to show respect to their beliefs, or they will never listen."
Hmmm... I really dunno dude. That sounds weird. Do we really have to respect false beliefs? When you consider from whom those beliefs come, in essence, would you not be respecting...Satan? Just a thought.
Re Matt’s comments: There are flaws in your message. First off, HM mag and rock bands are entertainment and to say Muslims would start a riot by seeing an ad with symbols in a trash bin in a rock mag is absurdity of the highest order. The rioting over the Newsweek lies comes over a worldwide magazine that supposedly offers truth and objective news. That’s a far cry from being a rock mag. Those people that riot and kill in the Middle East for their religion are the same type of people that riot and kill in America for different things; they are thugs, murderers and evil-doers. To say we need to watch we say and do because we might upset evil people and make them do evil is even more non-sense and is highly unbiblical. Evil people will use any excuse to do evil. All of us will stand before God alone and give an account of our behavior and no amount of finger pointing, over who made us do evil, will work. You wrote much about respect, which shows that you seem more concerned about seeking the praise of men rather than seeking the praise of God. I like what founding father Ignatius has to say about how we should “respect” or worry about those who don’t believe as us, “Yet there are some who in their blindness still reject him (Jesus)-or rather are rejected by him … So what is the point of my standing well in the opinion of a man who blasphemes my Lord…” (Ep. Smyr. 4-5)
I’m a little stunned that Matt would believe that the “Knights” ads were meant for bringing people to Christ. Check me if I’m wrong but the purpose of bands advertising in HM is to sell cd’s.
Once again, using sarcasm or satire is a perfectly legitimate avenue for Christians. There are a few situations where it can be done by those who chose to do so. One, in debate situations where the opposition has dogmatically chosen to stick with their side no matter the evidence against it and another situation would be within Christian circles. (As HM clearly is a Christian medium) Tecktonics website states things like this, “sarcasm and satire are certainly more likely to help people remain believers, rather than turning them into such. The satirical apologist is usually satirical in proportion to his opponent's unfounded dogmatic certitude conjoined to an unrelenting 'loudness'. The aim of satire is not so much to convert the opponent, but rather, to silence him, and that was indeed the case before the Pharisees, and before the opponents of the Fathers.”
Remember Christ stated, “I did not come to bring peace, but the sword.” (Matt. 10:34) Paul also asked, “Will I greet you with a whip or with an embrace?” (1 Cor. 4:21) Let us be careful when we push the peace and love at all costs thinking. It is not Biblical.
Matt then starts in about the Crusades, stating that God did use war but somehow Matt knew that the Crusades were definitely not a war of God. I’m curious how Matt knows the mind of God concerning the Crusades. Some campaigns did have success. It is trivial to go into what “may have happened had the Crusades never happened.” (reference to the Missionary story) We could play that game forever of going back over and over about things that may have led to better things. Regardless of how anyone feels about the Crusades, this rock band of concern is touting themselves as Knights of the ‘New Crusade’ thereby separating themselves from the old one. Unfortunately, the Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion in the world. I’m not sure where Matt gets his thousands of converts from. This means more Christians are being killed and Bibles destroyed with barely a sound of protest from the world.
One final thought from me. When I used to listen to secular heavy metal in the eighties, I remember bands like Machine Head and Pantera would wear T-shirts saying F*** Jesus. I remember reading a Christian article stating how these bands pretended to be real tough and mean but were really just attacking a target they knew wouldn’t hurt them, Christians. The article said if the bands really wanted to be tough, they would wear shirts that said F*** Allah or F*** Mohammed. I don’t condone wearing a shirt like that but a lot has to be said for the Knights for taking a bold move that could end their lives if someone really takes this entertainment mag as serious as Matt thinks they will.
Only in our “victim culture” would we worry about such trivial non-sense. Let Doug run his mag and let us worry more about spreading the Word with the gifts we have, including satire and humor.
Wow - a lot of people claim to be mind readers here, and can judge me for what they think I beleive. That's amazing. I believe in being fully bold for Jesus, and not worrying what man thinks. But not being obsessed with what man thinks doesn't mean that we give up the whole command to be as wise as serpents. Random, mindless boldness usually turns more people away from Jesus than towards him.
- I have been to a Muslim countries, and I have shared Jesus with Muslims. Can any of you claiming that I worry about the respect of man too much claim that? I have done things for Jesus that could have gotten me killed. Not exactly worring too much about the praise of men there. I do know that if you bash a Muslim's religion, they won't listen to you. How can you lead someone to Jesus if they won't listen to you? If you don't like the use of the word respect, then I am sorry. What word should I use to show the opposite of bashing someone?
- The Knights have stated that they just wanted people to come to Jesus through the ad, website, etc.
- I know Muslims. I have been to Muslims countries. My logic is not absurd. To show the name of allah, or to say what those t-shitrs say, is blasphemy in the Muslim religion. They started the riots because of the blasphemy. They wouldn't care what magazine it is in. If you are so sure they won't care, then why don't you email the ad to Al-Jezeera (or however you spell that Middle Eastern TV station)?
- Check out Voice of the Marytrs, statistics of global evangelism, or a book called Operation World if you doubt the conversion statistics. And actually, it's tens of thousands of Chrisitans that get killed without anyone giving a flip. And, actually, if you go to a Muslim country, you find out that most people killed for their faith are never even reported. Check www.persecution.com
- To a Muslim - and this gets re-hashed EVERY time a Christian organization uses the term "new crusade" for something - putting the word "new" in front of something won't matter. Yes, it should matter, but it never has - so why should it now?
- I never claimed to know the mind of God on the crusades, I was just questioning the thought process that the leaders of the church called for the Crusades so they were obvious the right thing to do. A lot of Godly men at the time of the crusades questioned them. A lot of chuch leaders of the time disagreed with them.
- If you really know how seriously stuff like what the Knights do turns people away from Christ, you would know how "trivial" this is. I have talked to hundrends - yes hundreds - of non-Christians that rejected Jesus because they felt disrespected by some Christian. It took months of showing love, patience, and - yes - respect to these people to bring them back to Jesus. And there were NO other Christians there helping me with the process. So, I am sorry if I sound frustrated, but from someone who is out there actually sharing Jesus with people, I am tired of having to spend so much extra time bringing someone to faith in Jesus because of something someone on TV said, or some pastor did, or some mean spirited Christian did.
- Paul never used a whip. That's what you call an "illustration." He did that a lot. Yes, Jesus said he came with a sword. Then he also said "put away your swords" when his followers drew them in the garden. "Those who live by the sword, die by the sword" was meant as a rebuke, not a random philosophical statement. You can interpret "turn the other cheek" and forgiving 70 times 7 times however you want.
- Attacking someone by name in a public forum is unbiblical. You wanna disagree, fine, but - geez.... Lay off the attacks. That would include attacks on the Knights. Raise your disagreements, but be nice about it.
- To me, showing respect to what someone believes just means not bashing the person. I didn't mean it as agreeing with or repecting WHAT they believe. So, Lauren, good thought. Like I said, I would use a different word if I could think of one.
I'm fully with Matt on this one. As a somewhat recent convert (4 years ago) I can vividly remember hating Christians with a passion. But it wasn't Christ or his message I hated, it was just his fans.
Jeff's example of Elijah and the prophets of Baal is completely out of context in terms of modern evangelism and apologetics. What about Acts 17:23? Paul points out a Greek idol and tells them that its the Christian God. That's pretty offensive to a "Christian" mindset but then again, didn't Paul say that he strove to be all things to all people (ie, bending over backwards to meet them where they were at)? I realize that understanding and respecting differences is more challenging and time-consuming than triumphalistic Chic-track style evangelism, but we're not called to take the easy way out.
A good article:
Violence in the Bible and the Qur'an
A Christian Perspective
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Terrorism/violence.html
And another good one on the crusades:
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Authors/Arlandson/crusades.htm
Here's also another interesting quote I found: "Osama bin Laden certainly thinks so. In his various video performances, he never fails to describe the American war against terrorism as a new Crusade against Islam" I don't think he used the word "new" to seperate it from the past crusades.
Deviak, you are just like so many people I have met. I wish the church would wake up and listen to your testimony. I found plenty of 'churches' that have, but the Church as a whole needs to step up.
I've never thought about what you state about Paul. At first I was like "Hey! What!" But, if you really think about it, and read the passage carefully, he does say "what you see as unknown I tell you can be known" as a reference to the unknown god statue. Interesting. Good point. I can feel the critics out there bristling right now. Read and think first.
Matt: Your points really just dance around the topic and are argumentative for arguments sake. I’m not saying that the symbol would never be offensive in any setting, I’m saying that the symbol in this situation and this setting wouldn’t be. This is a Christian rock magazine and nothing more. I give the Muslims much more credit than you for being intelligent enough to know it’s an entertainment mag. You must think the majority of Muslims are mindless thugs just looking for an excuse to start riots. To say that Muslims won’t convert because they feel disrespected by Christians is oversimplification and highly delusional to believe it. The Holy Spirit changes people not man.
I know satire and teasing can convert people because the streets are full of people who “used” to go to church and don’t because they were teased in school and with their friends that believing in God is akin to believing in Santa Claus. So apparently satire or “disrespecting” has a place in converting some people. I’m curious also how you know the mind of God on what can and can’t convert people.
The verses about Paul using a whip and Christ coming with the sword were clearly understood as being illustrative. I don’t know why you would have thought differently. The subject in discussion isn’t about the Knights whipping people, it’s about the words or impressions of a symbol. I still think you don’t understand the verses anyway. Paul was coming to clean house if need be and that would mean saying biting words to get people on track. Christ coming with the sword meant he was coming to “divide” the fake from the real… The believers from the non-believers. Christ told Peter to put the sword away because it “was” an actual sword.
Sorry you feel “attacked.” I think your problem is, I merely disagreed with you and therefore you felt attacked. You are a part of the victim culture where everyone is to blame except yourself. That is why you are pushing this victim status on the Muslims over an ad in a rock mag.
Deviak: You never stated why you hated Christians previously and even if you stated that is was lack of respect as a non-believer, that would only mean that it was your perception that you were disrespected. Making that claim is highly subjective as is any claim as to why people won’t become Christians.
You claim you know what works or not in modern evangelism? You might want to let everyone know your formula then. To say, certain thoughts and behaviors of those in the Bible were only applicable to that time and history is treading on thin water. All scripture is useful for instruction.
Your thinking gets garbled about the Unknown God reference. Where in the world does this tie in with anything? And why would Paul stating to unbelievers (Greeks) that the unknown god is really the true God, be offensive to Christians? In essence Paul was doing what the “Knights” were doing. Calling all the other gods fake and trash for the bin and the real god is the one you don’t know about. You basically affirmed what the “Knights” did!?!
Listen all, the “Knights” showed their pride for God for being the real God and that the others are deceptions and senders of people to hell and they DID IT in a Christian forum and not in downtown Bagdad.
Jeff Wilson
Deviak...I'd never before read that story in the Bible. It floored me! "...the One whom you worship w/out knowing, Him I proclaim to you." Man, that is so heavy. I'm glad you brought it up.
One more comment. It’s a good thing the Knights advertised in a Christian mag where the readers are compassionate, loving, patient and understanding. I can imagine what the readers would say in a secular mag. They would call them evil, hateful and disrespectful. Probably align them with murderers.
We should be ashamed of ourselves. The only people receiving compassion and understanding are the hypothetical disrespected Muslims. This whole exercise shows where our real alliances lie! Doug had it right when his first thought of the ad was, “boys will be boys.” Why don’t we show a little understanding and patience with these “boys” like the good Christians we’re portraying ourselves to be in these postings? The Bible instructs us to treat our brothers in Christ better than unbelievers. Should we ask the boys in “Knights” if thats been true?
Jeff Wilson
AMEN jeff, you really hit the tooth and nail on the head with that one! For Christians, everyone here has been quick to hate and judge, especially Stephen from Anberlin. That guy is so filled with hate that wanted to ban the Knights from HM. Maybe a little fame and money brought the devil out in him! The Knights have been very well-spoken and peaceful with everything they have submitted to these two postings. They are clearly very serious about spreading the word of God and maybe they are using shock tactics, but that is better than using no tactics and claiming to be a Christian band who says nothing about Christ...anberlin. Listen to the completely hard rocking/jesus loving song "Born Winner" from the Knights and I gaurentee you'll be hooked!! P.S. Scoop: I love you!!
"That is why you are pushing this victim status on the Muslims over an ad in a rock mag." I don't see anything indicating ANYone here is using the victim mentality status. I don't see anywhere that it says that the guy from Anberlin wants anyone banned. And I don't see how the Knights guys was well spoken. He kept dancing around the issue of the their name and pointing fingers at Tooth & Nail and everyone else. Didn't a lot of Muslims get all mad about those Nike shoes that looked like they had "Allah" written on the back? Those are just shoes! That's at least got to be equal to an entertainment magazine! And I think if someeone is out trying to share Jesus with people, then they probably know something about modern evangelism. "To say that Muslims won’t convert because they feel disrespected by Christians is oversimplification and highly delusional to believe it" I would call that an attack. Maybe that's just delusional of me. "We should be ashamed of ourselves. The only people receiving compassion and understanding are the hypothetical disrespected Muslims" Yeah, not even the people who disagree with you are shown understanding or compassion.
well mr. tired maybe you dont believe God can work miracles for people doing his work.
shoes have got to be equal to an entertainment magazine-whatever that means. try walking a mile in somebody elses HM.
dancing around the issue of their name-just because the name is an issue to you, i dont think its an issue. the issue here is the ad which i admit is pretty bad.
and this isnt the 1st time that T&Ns ethics including using lawyers to keep bands quiet has been brought up, in fact if you search out message boards it comes up a lot.
ive bought plenty of T&N bands in the past but some of the stuff ive read disturbs me-doesnt mean it has to disturb anybody else tho.
if its just business as usual like other record companies thats fine but is it Christian and worthy of support, thats the question.
Jeff,
To get back to your questions; the thing I used to hate about Christians (and still do, come to think of it) is the pompous self-righteousness that results from ppl who aren't mature enough to handle an absolute truth claim without disrespecting those who don't share it.
As for my formula for modern evangelism: respect and love. Whether or not it works isn't even a relevant question. Faith is a gift from God and not something that even the most successful Billy Graham Crusade (there's that word again) can bestow. My only concern is that the narrowmindedness, ethnocentricity, and utter lack of diplomacy that Imperial Christendom (you know who I mean) is employing may be sabotaging the harvest.
As for the Paul thing, I agree, its not too relevant but neither was the Elijah/Baal showdown that someone brought up. My point was that Paul presents a better model of apologetics compared to Elijah's "My god can beat up your god" approach. And if you think about it, presenting a greek-made idol of stone as representing YHWH is very offensive, especially to us iconoclastic Prots. But that's exactly what Paul did. WWJD? Something that would piss us off and offend our delicate Christian sensibilities, I bet.
I think this boils down to deeper hermeneutical differences of which this "Knights" controversy is just a peripheral symptom. You either think that violence and disrespect for other religions is acceptable or you don't.
well put except i dont think disrespect and violence need to go hand in hand and it may be more of a spectrum with the"hermeneutical differences" occupying each end of it.
the violence in this ad is what i think is wrong-its not clear that it was "violence against demons" "spiritual war" etc. just bad judgment it seems and the apology was definitely in order.
"disprespect for other religions" is a whole other thing-you cant really respect something thats leading people to hell and the most neighborly thing you can do for people who have those beliefs is to try to save them. most people here seem to agree that showing active disprespect to a misbeliever, whatever you think of the misbelief, isnt likely to do the job. but being so respectful that you dont make any effort, the opposite end of the spectrum from where the Knights seem to be, isnt what Jesus asked us to do.
the problem with the people complaining about the original ad was that the complaints seemd centered on "i dont like this" not "this is against what Jesus taught".
yeah u can't decide that something is wrong by the fact that it offended u.
ironically, almost all the ppl offended by the ads were christians (save for the few atheists that commented). of the muslims i talked to who saw the ads none of them were offended. interesting. perhaps they know better than God's ppl that to be offended (especially by something that you already believe is wrong) is both a waste of time and a sin besides.
wow. what do you know. it is a picure of a christain holding the head of a beheaded muslim! i can see one winning lots of muslim souls with that one. it is not like muslims will be eternally bitter of christians for that.
the crucades, even if in the big picture were nessesary are not anything to boast about. violence, killing, murder should never be glorified. this makes US the terrorists!
well jamie, ur only bout 50 posts too late!
i know this thread is becoming as lame as the other one, but i don't suppose you actually read any of the previous posts...specifically mike andrews'?
go back and read it and u'll see that ur comments have already been discussed and settled.
yeah Jamie, I guess it's asking a lot for you to actually read other posts. kind of like walking up to a conversation and letting fly without bothering to listen long enough to find out what they're talking about.
you thought it must be a Muslim's head-why? because you wanted it to be? i didn't know that Muslims "looked" any specific way any more than Christians do. guess you know something I don't.
I just wanna say your "Knights" ads spun me into a state of pissed-off I've never been, there's too many good christian bands on T&N,Solid State and Bec, for their bullsh*t. You want revenge on Anberlin, then take it out on Anberlin and not the label ya smucks. However, I stand behind Anberlin, and many of the other posts as well. Doug thanx for your apology. Hm continues to rock
Re Deviak: Here’s an absolute claim and lets see if you can handle it. God can use sarcasm and humor to prick someone’s heart and change them.
Next, you admit that respect and love may or may not work (something constantly repeated above) for evangelism but somehow you know that humor ads or the symbols going in the trash definitely doesn’t work. How do you know the mind of God??? I’ve repeated this question a few times already to you people who keep saying that you know what doesn’t work for evangelism. 1) I presented the case above already that sarcasm can work as far as keeping people a Christian who are one, 2) I also have presented the case above that sarcasm and humor can make people change their position and 3) we do see Christ employing sarcasm in the New Testament plus the specific incidences mentioned a few times in the Old Testament. What’s not sinking in?
I don’t know who brought up the Paul thing but it was a bad analogy and you are still making it worse. Paul, in essence, WAS saying “my God can beat up your god” as Elijah did. He said that the unknown god/idol WAS creator of the universe and your gods do nothing. And contrary to what keeps being said about this incident, Paul wasn’t saying that the unknown god statue/idol was God or an idol to the real God unknowingly but that the real God WAS unknown to them. You’re implying that people who were worshipping the unknown god/idol were actually worshipping the real God. That’s not the case. Paul was letting them know that they had it right that there was an unknown god but the idol wasn’t it. You’re misunderstanding what Paul was really saying.
Your end statement comes out of left field and really doesn’t apply here. “You either think that violence and disrespect for other religions is acceptable or you don't.”
First off, what violence? Real or imagined? The head cutting off ad? Is a comedic ad ranked on the same as level as someone really getting their head cut off to you? If you believe so, you’ve got issues. Second, it hasn’t been established that there was any disrespect. Those who believe so push it that way as part of their ‘everyone’s a victim’ attitude. Others with more compassion and a sense of humor don’t see it that way. All you did was create a straw man and attack it.
I still see people keep saying how these ads won’t win Muslims over. Nobody in these posts has shown that these guys in the “Knights” ever said that they intended to win Muslims over with the ads. Show me where these guys have said both ads were intended to win Muslim converts and then we can talk about how this kind of thing won’t win converts. They claim they want to win people to Christ but this shouldn’t exclude them from showing their pride in God by using sarcasm in Christian environments. I haven’t heard their music but I went to their website and I was linked to a secular site that mentioned that they heard these guys talking about Jesus and trying to win souls. So, number one, they’ve shown that in settings with non-believers they appear to preach the love of Christ. Great! Number two, in Christian circles (HM magazine) they use humor and sarcasm against the religions who oppose and despise the true God of the Bible. That is totally acceptable. I listed in a previous posting situations when sarcasm is acceptable and in Christian mediums (Christian magazines/books/ etc.) it can be used to stop people from changing faiths… those who may not have the pride for Christianity as they should.
Deviak, I think your problem is you’re looking too much to find things “you hate about Christians.”
Re Tired of all this: 1) People going around knowing what will offend other people is a perfect example of the victim mentality. I sorry I used a reference you didn’t understand. Maybe you should have kept you words to yourself.
2) “’To say that Muslims won’t convert because they feel disrespected by Christians is oversimplification and highly delusional to believe it’ I would call that an attack.” A) To believe that that statement is an attack shows your alignment with the victim mentality B) It also shows you have no grasp of the English language and C) Is probably the most bizarre contention in all these posts. Listen, I’ve made my e-mail address available from my first post. Some of you may try contacting me first with disagreements because posting some of the thoughts that are out there shows to everyone a clear lack of linear thinking. Some seem to be hiding their e-mail address and by the evidence of some of their thoughts, it is probably for a good reason.
JEFF WILSON, dude you have to chill out! Your opinions are no better or wiser than anyone else's. If you're going to write something that ridiculously long do it in a personal email, and quit wasting space. You talk of the bible as if you were there when it was written. And everyone else is misinterpreting it but you, right? Get off your podium genius!
Want to thank everyone for speaking their consciences again, and of course especially the people who have been supporting us. I do ask PLEASE, however, that the Anberlin bashing stop. Stephen means well.
Thanks and God Bless.
Phantom, if you have any particular problem with something I said, then you can e-mail me personally and we can discuss it instead of taking up space complaining.
You have to hide your emails in public forums like this or you will get spam. Or at least I do. Just because someone feels attacked doesn't mean they are blaming every problem on everyone else but themselves. That's the true victim mentality. Calling someone delusional does not seem like a complement to me, it seems like an attack. It seems like you turn around and blame everyone else for disagreeing with you - and that seems to be more of a victim mentality. And I still don't see where anyone complained about sarcasm. And if the Knights didn't want to win Muslims, why did they use Muslim symbols? And I was speaking of the Knights name, not HM's name for heaven's sake. Read, people.
Jeff: I do not have a problem with anything you said on a personal level. Maybe you should read the last post again! I said that you took up far too much room - you did, and you’re not that important. I also said that your OPINIONS of the bible/Christianity etc. are no better or worse than anyone else's - they aren't; your views are your opinion, not absolute facts to be chiseled into a stone tablet and given to Moses. So like I said before…chill out.
Preview raise straight rolled check south fold hard enjoy pacific poker room http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/rooms-pacific-poker.html fishhooks ( http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/rooms-pacific-poker.html ) juice progressive! Likewise em door croupier pacific poker home rock check symbols overplay heads amount fold http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/pacific-poker-site.html value grip hearts amount foul game event ( http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/pacific-poker-site.html ) bust. As the ring heads surrender company pacific poker site lowball hard full rounder less variance http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net pot baccarat ceedy nuts middle earn trio cards table ( http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net ) speek bullets em rank! As you see
credit pacific poker bonus codes royale standoff multiplayer pressure http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/pacific-poker-bonus.html represent casino roulette credit bet juice earn blind ( http://pacific-poker-site.cjb.net/pacific-poker-bonus.html ) cowboys gambling basic bottom scratch tapioca!
Yeah, Doug has talked about all the spammers that misuse this site. It's not a good idea to post your email address.
From the web: "A victim mentality is one where you blame everyone else for what happens in your world." Interesting words there EVERYONE and YOUR. Until you know what a person thinks about everything going on in their life, you can't judge them as having a victim mentality.
I want to go back and revisit the original ad that sparked this debate. Looking at the ad, there is really nothing in the ad that addresses Christians. Actually, they never even refer to Jesus in the ad. They only have a cross, and plenty of non-Christian bands out there use crosses and medievial imagery, so that is not proof. They do have their website listed, and going on the site you can find out they are Christians. And they are advertising in a Christian magazine. The ad says "The Knights of the New Crusade are taking out the trash! of false beliefs with their new CD My God is Alive! Sorry About Yours!" Then there is a picture of a trash can with four symbols in it - a pentagram, a crescent moon w/ star (Muslim symbol), the name of allah in arabic, and another symbol that I recognize but can't place.
So, the question could be, "why is this in a Christian magazine?" Do they think that all the readers are really following false religions? Probably not. The name of the CD is "MY God is alive! Sorry about YOURS!" To me, that seems to address someone who has different beliefs than the writer. Since half of the symbols going in the trash can are Islamic, I would say that in part they are trying to address Muslims (or accuse the readers of HM of being Muslims in disguise :)
In Islam, trash is considered to be unholy, and to throw the name of their god into the trash would be an insult to their god. I have tried the "your god is false so follow Jesus" witnessing technique with Muslims and found that they only get offended and stop listening to me. It's really hard to witness to someone who is not listening to you. I finally realized that the more I offend people, the more work the Holy Spirit has to do to get that person saved. Why would I want to work against the Holy Spirit?
Muslims are a very diverse group. I have only really dealt with those that actually live in the Middle East or who have just recently moved here. I could just as easily go out and find a hundred Muslims (here or overseas) that don't think the original ad is offensive. That's just the nature of human beings - some just don't care as much about what their religion says should be offensive. Like a Muslim neighbor of mine said once "I should be offended at that, but I've been in the US long enough to not care."
Also, as a published writer and a professional graphic artist, I take offense at the whole "it's only entertainment, don't take it so seriously" stuff. Artists work too long, too hard, and spend way too much money on their art for it to be taken so lightly. There are some artist who do want people to be moved by their work (and some don't). But, if it's just entertainment, then being so bold in their lyrics and with their image is a waste of time. If entertainment can't move and touch people, then being evangelistic is pointless, because - "it's just entertainment." When people have been offended at my work, I would never accuse them of being a victim, or of having issues, or anything totally off base as that. I've apologized and tried to see what I could do to make sure that the true meaning of my work is getting represented. I don't just assume that I am so holy that they are getting offended at the Christ-likeness of my work. But if it comes down to it, if they are offended at Jesus and something in my art reminds them of that, then there is nothing that I can do. But I am not stupid enough to think that when someone gets offended at me, then it is automatically because of Jesus. I am human and I tend to look at myself as the cause of my problems first.
Hmmmm.... Yeah. I've really got a victim mentality.
See, that is sarcasm (which, I just searched this whole page and can't find anyone saying sarcasm is wrong). If the Knights are using sarcasm, then it's hidden so deep that a writer such as myself can't even find it.
Most of the responses from the Knights have seemed to contain all the right words, but with several subtle jabs at several people. And my biggest question is, how can you spend all the time to put together an ad where you had to Photoshop it (or something like that) to look like someone is getting beheaded, and not ever notice that the guy was wearing a T & N shirt? You spend all this time on your costumes but then say you never noticed what the guy posing in the second ad was wearing? I just don't buy it.
Thanks for the thoughtful comments, Matt.
I'm flattered that our costumes look as though a lot of time went into them, but I assure you that it isn't the case. We probably would wear something more period authentic than jeans and sneakers if we were putting a lot of time into them.
It was also a lack of time that made it so unfortunately unclear that it's the devil being beheaded.
Knowing what I now know, I kind of wish that it had been intentional that the body wear a T&N t shirt-that message, although unintended at the time, seems to be resonating with a lot of people.
If, for some reason, we had wanted to direct some unChristian vituperation Anberlin's way, we would have used an Anberlin t-shirt. Of course, we wish them nothing but the best even if we disagree in both our musical and lyrical approaches.
'I have tried the "your god is false so follow Jesus" witnessing technique with Muslims and found that they only get offended and stop listening to me. It's really hard to witness to someone who is not listening to you.'
Matt -- the parable of the sower dude. You are planting seeds. Speak truth. That is imperative. Tell them Allah is false. If a Muslim's heart is hard ground, it won't matter how inoffensive you are, he won't receive ur message. The TECHNIQUE isn't so much the problem, but the SOIL. In the end...a harvest will come, but not in every person u witnessed to, or with the results u expected.
Let’s try to stop repeating errors. Here…
1) Until we have a Muslim write in, lets stop saying the Knights have offended someone. Enough with the imaginary offended Muslims. This was done in a Christian mag. I have yet to read from an actual offended Muslim. I’m sure they’re not reading Christian mags. (I’m sure a few people wanting to prove a point will pretend to be a Muslim and write in now)
2) I’ve said previously several times that in a Christian medium (HM Mag) sarcasm or humor, as in the Knights ads, are perfectly acceptable and normally have the function of keeping people to remain in their faith. (Anyone can find this by looking it up in an apologetics book) A morale booster type effect. Matt seems confused about why the symbols going in the trash are in a Christian mag. Well, some Christians may want to buy the type of music that has the type of Christian pride that the Knights exhibit. If the Knights would have placed that ad in a Muslim mag then we might want to question their judgment. Matt, you read about the victim status part I used why did you skip the other stuff?
3) Both Matt and Lauren then proceed to let us know that they know what offends people and they know what works in evangelism. Several, if not more, I believe have stated they know what works and what doesn’t work with evangelism. This is pretending to know the mind of God. The so-called examples where people have said they’ve ‘tried that approach’ and it didn’t work shows faulty logic. One, no one ever suggested to try sarcasm right to the Muslim’s faces. The Knights didn’t even do that. It’s in a Christian mag. Two, no one has ever won an argument by stating that they know what is true from their experience. A lot of posts here have used the “from my experience” reasoning and that wouldn’t hold water in court or debate. Unless someone identifies you as an expert in that so-called field of experience, your opinion from experience is meaningless. This leads me to point four…
4) I’ve not stated anything about experience in my posts. You can go to Tektonics apologetics website and confirm that an expert says sarcasm and humor have its place and they list those places. I’ve also used the Bible as reference to when it (sarcasm/humor) has been used in the old and New Testaments.
Finally, regardless if some of you are too worried about posting your e-mail addresses for fear of spam, I’ve still posted mine and I still can be reached personally if you have a problem with what I’ve written.
Jeff
PS. I got one spam so far. Anberlin put me on their e-mail list. Big deal.
"...Lauren then proceed to let us know that they know what offends people and they know what works in evangelism."
nope. i never did that...b/c i've never shared my faith w/ a muslim in my life...so i have no clue what works. basically what i said was...EVERTHING works in a sense. i said that the problem was the hearts of the ppl and whether their hearts are hardened to evangelism.
i dont' know what offends ppl either. and i never stated anything bout claiming to know what is offensive. altho i find it incredible that christians are offended by the Knights...when the muslims i talked to were not. i believe taking the time to be offended (period) is a waste.
I am not opposed to the Knights. You're preaching to the choir jeff.
Whom rack set base pacific poker roulette bust preferential cycle down croupier double blind http://www.mobilefamilydental.com/pacific-poker.html ( http://www.mobilefamilydental.com/pacific-poker.html ) base ante aces double pocket nickel joker.
Call variations finger grinder play texas hold'em management gang muck implied shoe cap drop grip http://www.mobilefamilydental.com/texas-hold-em.html reels hole coup earn croupier ( http://www.mobilefamilydental.com/texas-hold-em.html ) gesture stiff bottom.
Perhaps play party poker rainbow advantage bottom ladies railbirds hand profit http://www.anylight4u.com/party-poker.html heads scalper lottery quads ( http://www.anylight4u.com/party-poker.html ) empirepoker joker scalper roulette figure rake.
Finally tipping monster showdown third easy spades paigow texas hold'em home buster line seconds fish consecutive denomination underdog scalper http://www.anylight4u.com/texas-hold-em.html stakes draw ( http://www.anylight4u.com/texas-hold-em.html ) bottom!
Respectfully base game less slow kicker raise lowball pacific poker room eight hand lowball juice http://www.anylight4u.com/pacific-poker.html bluff variance profit hanger deal ( http://www.anylight4u.com/pacific-poker.html ) layout event!
