here are some of the pics from the city lights myspace photo shoot which will comprise the majority of our new myspace page when it debut’s in late summer. all photos are courtesy of Alexa Chloe Villavicencio…she’s awesome as you will soon see. enjoy
it seems like a few weeks ago i last wrote something on here, but my timeline tells me differently, something like two months since i last posted something, crazy how time just will not slow down, and to tell you the truth i kind of need to keep moving fast because the air conditioner in the explorer is broken and quite frankly it’s hot, and i sweat…a lot. anywho, last month i graduated from college which officially made me a contributing member of society. also i began my first real full time job as a worship leader at one of the best churches in Charleston, Crosstowne Christian Church (publicity stunt? maybe…). also i spent one amazing day in the studio begining the long process that’s going to be our next record. unfortunately i spent the rest of my time in the emory university hospital with a viral infection. also spent some time in myrtle beach, much golf was played, and many words i should not say were said (doo doo, poop, dinglehogans, etc…). all in all it’s been a pretty wild few months, i said hello to many new things, while i said goodbye to many others. and all the while life just keeps churning it’s wheels. i sit here now in my finally finished and furnished room in our brand new house watching the cursor blink at me every second dreaming of what stories will be told here in this very comfortable chair, what photos will be posted from here, what nuggets i will hopefully dream of here, what books will be read here, what matt chandler sermons will be listened to here, and what kind of life will settle here each and every day, hopefully it’s one i’m living, if not, i’ll see you in two months…
for all of you who are either looking for an intersting theological debate or are just bored and want to waste a few minutes then i give you an implications paper i had to write for a debate as a requirement for my contemporary theology class…it’s a little long, but not even close to the number of years this debate has been going on for. anyway, here it is.
Pluralism
Pluralism by definition is the belief that “all major world religions lead to God and salvation”. Many individuals view this belief system in terms of a mountain, with all roads leading to the top, which represents salvation and ultimately heaven. Traditionally this has not been the stance of the church, but it is a stance that can be accurately taken and defended in light of God’s love for the culture that is not only present today, where the implications of such a belief system are tremendous, but the cultures of the past as well.
Infants and Redemption
One of the toughest challenges facing the exclusivist belief system is the question of what happens to those who die without an understanding of what or who God is and are not capable of such an understanding, such as infants who die before being able to attain such an understanding. It is important to note before diving into such an issue that it is not the knowledge of God that saves, such as the ability to remember and know certain facts regarding Christ and the Bible; it is rather God who saves. As John Sanders states in his book Never Heard “the central problem of salvation is not knowledge of God but faith in God”. Adhering to the previously mentioned stance of a so-called “salvation by knowledge” is a “major misunderstanding of Biblical faith [that] has certain affinities to gnosticism, where salvation is brought about by special knowledge that an initiate receives”. As Sanders further states “such a view of faith implies that our predicament is ignorance and is solved when we learn certain truths [in other words] salvation by knowledge”. This is simply not the case. Salvation is by faith, and faith alone, and it is not by any merit one as a human can attain no matter how “perfect” a life is lived. Essentially, faith, as seen in the Bible, is “believ[ing] [in] the truth God reveals, [trusting] that God has our best interests in mind and [acting] on the truth we have ”. As Sanders states “Genuine faith in God contains some truth about God, whether that truth comes from the Bible or from God’s work in creation”. Though many Christians have no issue with this part of the argument, many find fault in the issue of what “one has to know in order to enter into a saving relationship with Christ”. Sanders further goes onto state:
“Some Christians maintain that only a full knowledge of the life and the atoning work of Jesus can save. But is it really knowledge that saves us, or is it God? God is the one who saves, and he does this despite people’s various theological understandings. People are acceptable to God if they respond in faith, however limited their knowledge is”.
This statement ushers in perfectly the issue regarding what happens to the infants that die. Many exclusivists will argue for a distinction between original sin and sins “committed while in the body”. Roger Nicole argues that the “picture of judgment in Scripture is [one where] we find condemnation is in fact meted out in terms of sin committed while in the body”. Such verses are cited as 2 Corinthians 5:10, Jeremiah 17:10 and Matthew 16:27, just to name a few. Nicole further argues “those who die in infancy have no personal guilt of that type (sins committed while in the body) since they die before the age of accountability”. Therefore it is safe to assume from this type of argument that infants who die will receive salvation. However, one may argue that despite of this fact, sin is sin regardless of the situation. Due to the fact that infants are born into sin naturally because of Adam, therefore they still should be condemned. However, “it is not apparent that they will ultimately be condemned since they did not commit any of the personal sins that constitute the basis of the condemnation meted out at the last judgment to the non-elect”. As Nicole finally states:
“One could, therefore, infer that infants dying in infancy are incorporated without an act of their will in the condemnation of Adam and similarly are ingrafted without an act of personal faith into the saving benefits of the work of Christ”.
To be fair this argument was made against the question of what deciphers an infant who dies unevangelized from an adult who dies unevangelized. Despite this fact, one can see that this issue is a tough out regardless of which particular standpoint one holds to.
On the opposite side of the podium, those who represent the view this student is seeking to argue ask a very important question summed up best by John Sanders. He asks, “Does God love adult unevangelized persons less than he loves infants?” This is an important question to answer, for to answer yes implies that God is not fair in his perfect love, and to disagree implies that God could potentially extend grace to those who have not been reached with the gospel message in allowing them the same kind of “pass” so-to-speak that infants may receive upon death. As stated previously, exclusivists hold that there are two kinds of people who are saved, “those who place their faith in Jesus, and those who are incapable of responding to Jesus”. One therefore logically must ask, “why not include at least some adult unevangelized in the second group?” The answer seems as if he would. However, the idea of adults being guilty of “actual sin while infants are guilty of original sin which God overlooks because of Christ” pervades the entire issue, because if
“God overlooks original sin due to the atonement of Jesus, then why can’t God apply the atonement to the adult unevangelized who exercise faith in God? Though both groups remains ignorant of the atonement, the God who desires all to be saved can redeem sinners on the basis of the righteousness of Christ”.
Thus this implication of infants who die without receiving salvation bleeds thoroughly into the entire belief system of destiny of the unevangelized. Though some may write this off as being contradictory to the quality of God’s justness, it actually displays a beautiful picture “of the dreadful realities of sin [and the ability of God] to triumph over sin in providing redemption for sinners”. As Sanders concludes:
“God hates the sin that destroys the beings he created, for love cannot stand by and watch the beloved ruin herself. Divine love detests the corruption of sin, but it also motivates God to redeem the situation. It is this God who makes salvation universally available to Abraham, to Job, to babies dying in infancy and to the rest of the unevangelized”.
Though it seems like such a small issue at first glance, it is clear to see that this issue as previously stated bleeds thoroughly into the entire belief system of the unevangelized.
Missions?
Another important implication of this particular viewpoint is the issue of whether or not missions is something needed since unevangelized peoples are able to receive salvation without its aid. Exclusivists are quick to hop aboard the missions train due to the fact that in their mind all unevangelized will be dammed to hell if not for their going, and as Sanders attests, “it has for so long been trumpeted as the only motivation for missions that many Christians are unaware that this was not the motivation of many of the great missionaries in history”. In agreeance with Sanders, this student is arguing that the mission’s table needs to be supported by more than just this leg. Sanders further elaborates on this by saying:
“If God wants all to be saved but none can be saved except those who hear about Christ, then God cannot save those he desires. Moreover, if salvation is entirely dependant on human preaching, then some will suffer eternal damnation due to the failure and disobedience of Christians. In other words, their damnation is the result of the sin of Christians”.
It is at this point that exclusivists seek to draw their proverbial line in the sand, for it is their standpoint on this view of missions that the “sending of missionaries is bad news for the unevangelized, since if they hear the gospel and reject it they are now lost, whereas they were possibly saved before the missionaries arrived”. Though this is a logical conclusion to make, and makes a great matter of sense to this student, there is a clear distinction to be made that not all unevangelized persons will believe. Meaning that some who hear the gospel will reject it, for it is ultimately a choice of the human will. However, as Sanders states “unevangelized believers will accept the gospel once they come to understand it”. In other words, when the gospel is presented to those who have responded to the light they have been given, they will accept it. Obviously, issues come up between cultures that may inhibit this temporarily, as well as the fact that Christians in some cases do not present the Gospel all to well to unbelievers. It is also important to note that in some cases “it [is] not the gospel that was rejected but rather Western Imperialism” which is applicable not only for today, but as far back as the Crusades. Furthermore, the missions table presents an even steeper problem for exclusivists due to the fact that “adult unevangelized can be saved only if they hear the gospel from human missionaries”. As Sanders brilliantly states:
“If no missionaries go to them, they are all dammed. Because of the failure of Christians, they are not given the opportunity for salvation. This means that Christian sinfulness makes God unable to save those he desires to save. It makes no sense to say God does all he can to save all individuals if he allows some of them to be dammed through unfavorable circumstances.”
Thus is the problem many exclusivists have in debating this issue, if God desires to save all of humanity, why would he be prohibited by Christians to be able to accomplish his work if it is truly his desire to save all of humanity? It is a challenging question to say the least and is important to remember “God does not love people only when missionaries arrive on the scene”.
Returning back to a few reasons why persons holding to this particular standpoint view missions as important, it is good starting point to state that first of all it is commanded in scripture for one as a believer to go (Matthew 28:18-20). Secondly, in accordance with the command of scripture, one as a believer should have the uncontrollable desire to share the true life found in Jesus Christ with as many individuals as possible. Thirdly, “there are people who are not believers in God, and they need to hear of Christ”. This may be an obvious statement, but it is still worth stating. Finally, “even though unevangelized believers will be given eternal life on the basis of Christ’s work, God wants them to experience the fullness of life that came at Pentecost”. The Christian life is so much more than a life of do’s and don’t, it is a life that is filled with hope and with a love that is beyond compare, for one as a human being was created by the one who sums himself up in it. This is a life that needs to be shared, and a life that God desires for us to live (Matthew 5:16), for as previously stated he has our best interests in mind, and why wouldn’t one want to share that? There is also something to be said for the community that comes with being apart of the Christian faith. It is something that Jesus not only believed in thoroughly, but also modeled brilliantly from the choosing of his disciples to the places he dined. Sanders provides a perfect analogy summing up this issue of missions. He states:
“What if we knew of a group of people who lacked pure drinking water and were suffering from diarrhea and dehydration? What if we also knew they would survive despite these problems? Would we then be exempt from helping them now? Would we be justified in sitting by idly while they suffered? I think not. We have ample reasons for taking the needed technology to them now even if they will survive without it”.
Conclusion
Overall, the implications of this belief system are vast. As one can see, even with these two issues of infant redemption and missions that tie hand in hand, this issue who will be saved is one that is not easily solved. When it’s all said and done, it is God who does the saving, not humanity. This is important to realize, but as adequately stated above, it does not give us reason to not go. Whether it’s the life of a newborn infant or of a fifty-six year old atheist, it is God that penetrates the heart in order to save. It is this student’s belief that he graciously offers this to all, and rewards in redeeming fashion to those who adequately respond to the light that they have been given. As Sanders states:
“God’s distributive justice provides every individual with an opportunity to be saved. In grace and justice Jesus died for sinners, and in grace and justice that redemption is applied to those evangelized who confess Christ and those unevangelized believers who exercise faith in God despite their limited understanding. I do not see a split between God’s love and justice. Rather, God justly carries out his love toward sinners”.
Works Cited
Alvin Plantinga, A Defense of Religious Exclusivism, “Religious Exclusivism Versus Religious Pluralism”: available from http://www.cofc.edu/hettinger/ Intro_to_Philosophy_Sp_06/Plantinga_Religious_Exclusivism.htm Internet; Accessed 11 April 2009.
TheologicalStudies.org. “What are Pluralism, Pluralism, and Exclusivism?” Available from http://www.theologicalstudies.org/pluralism.html. Internet; Accessed 17 March 2009.
Wisdom Truth and Spirituality: Many Paths “Our Living Tradition” : available from http://www.uufkc.org/pdf/s30601klein.pdf; Internet; Accessed 11 April 2009.
Sanders, John. Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevalgelized: What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1995.
Kenneth Boa, Robert M. Bowman, and Robert M. Bowman Jr. Sense and Nonsense About Heaven and Hell. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007.
so every once and awhile i find these articles on the internet that are directly related to what i’m doing right now in ministry. sometimes they challenge me, sometimes they just help to reinforce something that i’m already doing, and sometimes they suck, and i immediately regret reading them. this is one that challenged me a little bit. hopefully there will be more to come in the future that may do the same for you…after all, i’m unique, just like everybody else…
…
Article written by Seth “tower” Hurd
It’s a bad time to be in the concert business, or the music business in general. So I was shocked to see Chris Tomlin and Israel & New Breed sell out the Sears Center in suburban Chicago, a venue that’s recently hosted The Killers, Foo Fighters, and Lil Wayne.
The sold out arena is physical evidence that worship music is a big, big business. Praise & worship is the only music that touches the vast majority of Christians (other forms of Christian music exist in sub-genres: Sanctus Real in CCM, Underoath in the hardcore scene, Mars Ill in backpacker hip hop circles, etc). And it’s something that most Christians think very little about; even though music will fill roughly half the time we spend inside the church walls.
There’s a lot of amazing songs coming out of the worship movement right now, and a lot of incredible work being done by worship leaders at local churches. But since my job (Christian radio in Chicago) takes me into literally every kind of church you can dream up, I’ve also seen where Christians make poor decisions regarding worship music. Here’s a few humble suggestions on improving.
Drop your churches “official” worship leader
When my boss told me that I’d be broadcasting live from the sold-out Tomlin show, I replied, “I guess it will be like being at a bigger version of my church.” My own church, which is a typical suburban Chicago church full of mostly career types and young families, will use up to four Chris Tomlin songs in one service. I know of churches in Chicago that will only use Hillsong United songs for worship, and others that lean almost completely on the Desperation Band’s catalog.
The problem with this is twofold. First, it creates a monotonous sound for worship. Churches that do mostly Tomlin songs have mid-tempo-ballad worship environment, and Hillsong-worship churches give the impression that God must be a lot like famed Springsteen producer Phil Spector, since they only approach Him with walls of guitar sounds and nearly-screamed vocals.
Second, it gives the congregation one songwriters (or groups) perspective on God. One of the cool things about the myriad of worship music being created right now is that the songs are coming from many different perspectives. Most of Tomlin’s songs are inspired by the Psalms, where as Matt Redman tends to write based on seeing God work in the world (“Blessed Be Your Name” came out of watching the 9/11 footage on TV and seeing heroes rise up to help).
Go Retro and Re-introduce “Special Music”
I grew up in a church of less than 100 people, in a town of less than 50 people in (very) rural west-central Illinois. The church only had one paid staff member (the pastor), so the music was provided by alternating volunteer pianists, and one or two people who got up and lead songs from an old hymnal. And there was (and still is) a call each Sunday for “special music.”
When churches switched from hymns to modern worship songs in the early 90’s, the “special music” part of the service went with it.
Due to the indie explosion, there are more songs than ever being recorded than at any time in history. And there’s a lot of music that has something to say, but can’t be communally sung (and not all of them fall squarely into the “Christian” category). A great example for this Lent season can be found on Jon Foreman’s Spring EP. “I watched heaven dying today/We consumed heaven’s son/I drew first blood/I drew first blood.” While lyrics paint a gripping picture of the crucifixion and the song points the congregation towards scripture, this isn’t a song can be sung by a large group of people, with it’s falsetto vocals and staggar-beat rhythms. There should be a place in church for songs like this.
Reject Bad Songs
Well known Christian leader Chuck Colson once interrupted worship at his church after the congregation had just finished singing “Draw Me Close.” “Shall we sing that again,” the worship leader asked rhetorically. “NO!” Colson screamed in protest at the mindless lyrical fodder.
“Draw me close to you/never let me go.” If Lady GaGa, Moby, or Akon remixed this, most people would never guess that the popular club hit was actually a worship song. If the lyrics of a song can be equally applied to the crush of a 17-year-old girl as they can to Jesus, then we should seriously question it being used to point a group of believers’ collective hearts to God. In some genres of music, a great melody is enough to create a good song. Worship should say something, and that message must be in line with what the Bible says is true about God.
Embrace Diversity
In my three seasons as a judge on Inspiration Sensation, basically another Christian American Idol show, I was introduced to a whole new musical world. The show was filmed in Chicago, the birthplace of Black Gospel. Through the show, I had the privilege of meeting some of Gospel’s leaders, and learn more about the rich heritage and expansive song catalog of the genre. The show was filmed before a live audience, and I saw how many different groups of people were moved by black Gospel songs.
Too often, diverse churches only sing traditional “white contemporary church music,” as if we’re operating under the assumption that it’s better to have the songs sound vaguely like Nickelback ballads rather than trying out new songs that might be “risky.”
Also, we tend to rob songs of their regional nuances within the church walls. Despite the evil giant known as Clear Channel Radio, and other globalizing factors, live music still sounds different in each region of the country. One great example of worship music with a regional flare is the brilliant Mike Farris, a New Orleans native who retools traditional worship songs soaked in the soul influences of his home town, and backed by a Delta Blues band, horns and all.
Discover New Music
Studies show that once a group of people have sung a song eight times, it begins to become habit rather than active worship that points them towards the Creator. That means there is a constant need for new worship songs. Here’s a few underappreciated artists who are creating great vertically-focused songs.
Michael Gungor Band This husband-and-wife duo write songs out what God is going at their church in Denver, Co. Check out the hilarious “White Man,” with lyrics that stating that God is not a white Republican.
Sarah Kelly An old and very dear pal of mine, Sarah wrote her first worship songs in the middle of a horrifically abusive relationship. The experience granted her the ability to write songs that openly communicate pain, while maintaining a focus on Christ.
Phil Wickham There’s heavy doses of Euro-pop in this San Diego native’s offering to God. And in a genre dominated by traditional keyboards and acoustic guitars, that’s a very good thing. For an introduction, download his free live album Singalong, and be introduced to his stunning vocals.
The Glorious Unseen Yes, the rock-with—programmed-beats is oh so trendy at this particular moment when everyone is in love with the 80’s again. But the beauty in this band is that the songs are written from such a unique angle. “We expect the best/and nothing less from you/but will we embrace the suffering too,” sings frontman Ben Crist.
Seth “tower” Hurd can be heard weeknights in Chicago on 89.7 Shine.FM and in mid-Michigan on 101.7 FUSE FM. The TV show mentioned in this column was huge in Puerto Rico, so he got to feel like (a much less cool) Justin Timberlake when he was there on vacation.
taken from relevant.com
here’s a good article about how music that isn’t necessarily better, ends up making more of a lasting remark on the world and culture than music that’s sonically, and creatively better tends to do…pretty interesting…
http://www.relevantmagazine.com/columns/music/16419-cobain-and-biggie-how-we-misjudge-music
I hate when things are broken, when things don’t work the way they should.
as I sit in st. arbucks I am reminded of this once more.
recently I purchased a jacket in Baltimore at one of my favorite stores for probably, no definitely, more than I should have paid for it. but it looked cool, and I “needed” it for a photo shoot the next day, which of course justified me spending what I spent on it. nonetheless, I bought it, I wear it frequently, it is cool.
it’s so cool that the makers of it decided they would attach two little loops on the shoulders for no other reason I know of than to look cool, or perhaps to allow giant birds to grab a hold of you and whisk you away to a far away land like Narnia. I digress, but either way, it’s a cool jacket.
as I sat down at my table about an hour ago, I noticed something about my jacket that I hadn’t noticed before. one of those bird grabbing hooks on the shoulders had come apart, another tragic accident of button-supporting-too-much-weight I’m sure. nonetheless, my jacket is now not as it should be. if this jacket were made to keep me warm than it’s function and purpose would still largely be in tact, but it’s not. this jacket was not made to keep one warm, rather it was made to look cool. therefore because this is it’s design, it’s function is now interrupted. no longer does it look as cool as it once did, no longer do I look at it with pleasure as I put it on. actually my first response was to take it off.
and then I started thinking, it’s just a button, a button that can easily be sewed back on and made complete once again. though the loop hangs limply from my shoulder with no button to support it’s coolness, it will soon be fixed, it will soon be whole, it will soon be as it’s supposed to be.
after all, there is a small joy inside to see things as broken now fixed. seeing things that are unmended, or unsewn, made whole once again.
my missing button and dangling shoulder loop, just another example of the grace that’s all around. we sometimes just have to put on a cool jacket to see it.
this is an interview i found over on relevant.com featuring one of, if not, my favorite bands. enjoy
Catching Up With Copeland
by: Kevin Sheen
In late 2008 Copeland released its fourth studio album, You Are My Sunshine. While the album contained all that fans of the band would most-likely consider definitive-Copeland (catchy melodies with a tendency to belie darker and deeper lyrics), the title and the songs themselves seemed to indicate that the band is in a different place than when we last heard from them on their major-label release Eat, Sleep, Repeat.
Understanding that a lot took place between the release of Eat, Sleep Repeat and You Are My Sunshine, RELEVANT had the chance to connect with frontman Aaron Marsh to get his take on the new album, the band’s label shakeup and their connection with fans.
You Are My Sunshine seems to show the band in a much different place than where you were when Eat, Sleep, Repeat was released. Can you talk about some of the changes that occurred between the two albums and how they influenced You Are My Sunshine?
Well, the obvious change is the label. That played into our attitude when we were making the record for sure. We came to Tooth and Nail with some pretty ambitious ideas about how our record would be presented. The fact that they were so open to our requests definitely gave us some fire when we were making the record. Also, the fact that we didn’t have a label when we started writing the record, and we were essentially writing songs to shop to labels, made us really want to write strong songs and put our best foot forward.
There are two tracks on You Are My Sunshine (“The Grey Man” and “Chin Up”) that lyrically deal with coming ‘back to the start.’ Would you say that the idea of a re-set or re-prioritization was a theme for the record and/or for the band?
No, those lyrics aren’t really referring to our career. I hope that our career hasn’t gone back to the start. As usual, most of the lyrics on the record are more inspired by life and love. It’s not really my style to talk about our career in our songs.
The new album sounds much brighter than Eat, Sleep, Repeat, so much so that the reworking of “Chin Up” seems almost hopeful. Was the mood of the album a conscious choice in light of the much more introspective tone of Eat, Sleep, Repeat?
That’s interesting. We weren’t setting out to make something blatantly brighter. I feel like the songs themselves are fairly dark. I really like the line between lovely and creepy and we tried to stick close to that with the treatment of the songs. The lyrics are pretty dark, but the brighter music gives some balance.
The band has now worked with three different record labels. What is your overall philosophy in terms of working with a label? Do you view them as part of the creative process or more as a delivery channel or something else?
I try to keep them out of the creative process as much as I can. Tooth and Nail has been great. I think they trust us to make a record that our fans will enjoy. While I don’t think labels should be involved in the creative process in terms of shaping the record, I think they need to have a good understanding of the kind of record the artist wants to make in order to market them properly.
I would think that touring around the country would provide you with some unique perspectives. Have you noticed anything different, tangible or otherwise, with this tour, in terms of turnout for shows, the conversations you’ve had with fans or general observations?
Doing so many tours, and touring with so many different bands has really made me appreciate the folks who come to see us play headlining shows. I really feel like our fans love music for the same reasons I do. They look for good melodies, songs that really mean something and music that has the power to move you. We don’t have any of the fans who are just looking for the band to do backflips or bust out a glossy radio single. I’m having a great time playing to our fans right now.
from Relevant.com
last weekend my band Meet the Sky (www.myspace.com/meetthesky) had the opportunity to play at one of the few hometown shows we’ve been able to do over the past year. the turnout was great and we had an absolutely awesome time. these pics below are all courtesy of our friend Melissa Potter. enjoy.
over the next few, let’s just say weeks, because I genuinely have no idea when I will finish all of these, I am going to be writing little excerpts on music, which will, when complete, join the rest of the hopeful book essays that will one day comprise a book (hopefully). this is the first installment.
Music
Very few things in life can take someone somewhere quicker than a song. With a few lines, the various melodies that have at points defined who we were subconsciously whisk us away to places we never thought we’d go back. To places we tried desperately to forget. To places we never wanted to leave. With the first strum of the guitar, complete with it’s 90’s tone reminiscent of much of my 90’s music experience, Semisonic takes me to my couch where I intently find myself watching their hit “Closing Time” on VH1’s Top 20 Countdown as a wide-eyed 11 year old in a pair of Lee Pipes. With the first pluck of the E string on Explosions In The Sky’s “Your Hand In Mine”, I find myself captivated by a 50 foot movie screen as senior in high school, surrounded by my teammates who were accompanying me on the cinematic journey that was “Friday Night Lights.” Even now as I place these random thoughts down onto a plain white sheet of paper, Jeff Buckley gently serenades me with his rendition of “Hallelujah” which immediately ushers me back to my living room as I watch Seth Cohen drift away on his sailboat to Tahiti, wondering if his life in The OC will ever be the same again, it wasn’t, and neither was mine. Seth and The OC had nothing to do with this. Josh Swartz and the creators of the show had nothing to do with this. Not even Ryan Atwood and his wifebeader had anything to do with this. It was all Jeff Buckley. Where The OC placed me visually on my chronological time line, Jeff Buckley continues to sustain that beautiful link between the present and memory. This is one of the many beauties of song, and perhaps it is one of the many reasons why music will never not be around. For at points, our lives depend simply too much on our memories for it to be absent.
since september, me and three of my closests friends had a dream to make music that was easy to grab a hold of, but not surfacy to the point where there was no depth to the writing of it. we sought to essentially make indie, pop, rock songs that were catchy, while at the same time carrying with them a nugget of truth, even in the words of love, that the listener can grab a hold of and make their own. last monday we released all of our hard work onto the world wide web and the results have been nothing short of fascinating. the myspace plays alone top 5,000 and the profile views are more in number than that, all within the first 12 days. the comments and the messages that have flooded our comment wall and inbox have made us laugh at times, and smile gratefully at others. to see how in just a little over a weeks time so many people have welcomed theirselves onto our little journey known as meet the sky, is simply incredible. perhaps one of the greatest honors that we have had thus far came last night when we found out that we were selected from thousands of bands to perform in front of a panel of record execs in Nashville for a chance to earn a record deal with INO. what’s funny is, that performance in Nashville will be the first performance of our songs to an audience besides ourselves…we look forward to it though, hopefully we’ll represent well.
i mention all of these things not to plug my band or ask you to come and see us or any of that, but to say thanks to all of the people who have made this happen so quickly. everyone who has stopped by our page and listened to our songs, everyone who has watched our videos, everyone who has taken time out of their day to write an encouraging word on our wall or in our inbox, Phillip Mccart and everyone at Northwood Church who give us a place to play every week, and the opportunity to do what we love, you’ve each played a part in all of this, and i can speak for the rest of the guys in saying that we are truly grateful…it’s an incredible thing to see something you pour your soul into touch another’s…hopefully we’ll be able to put faces to names soon in thanking all of you individually, but for now, thanks to those mentioned above, though there was only one name mentioned, the rest of you know who you are…thank you.
