"That Kind of Girl" by DC Talk

Song: “That Kind of Girl”

Artist: DC Talk

Album: Free at Last (1992)

Track: 2

Musically, this album starts the absolute right way.  You don’t even catch your breath after the first track before Toby Mac drops into a very skillful rhyme that leaves your head spinning.  There is literally no silence between these tunes, and they flow so naturally together.  As a side note, the tunes are so close together that the cut between tracks on the CD is actually misplaced by a fraction of a second, leaving the “T-” from “Toby” on the first track, and the “-oby” on the second.  That’s a bit annoying when you’re listening to songs on random.

But while we found “Luv is a Verb” to be a pretty cool tune, lyrically it fell pretty flat. Let’s see if the boys do better here.

The Good

This song comes (sometimes directly) from the Proverbs.  It very intentionally casts the “forbidden woman” described in the book (chapter 4, for example) with the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31.  The depictions of these women are clear and to the point, and the point is convincing.

To this day, I cannot read Proverbs 31 without hearing this song in my head, and that is because the second verse comes directly from that chapter, very often word-for word.  This is good stuff here, and not to be missed.  They take the exact same approach as Scripture does, and that is to be commended and applauded.

I want to stress this, because I’m going to touch on a couple of lines a little later.  The entire approach of the song is right and good.  We’ll nitpick a couple of points, but overall, this is the approach Christian music should take.

Neither Good nor Bad

Talk about nitpicky!  I bring this one up because I reacted to it wrongly when I first heard the song, and so I’m guessing others misunderstood as well.  At least I think it was a misunderstand, since the line is a bit vague.

When I was first listening to the album, I thought the reference to the girl in the first verse drinking and smoking as alluding to sinful activity.  Mainly because I believed those activities were sinful.  I now think they were just fleshing out a character here and weren’t trying to say that a beer is sinful.  I don’t put the line in the “bad” column because I think it was my misunderstanding here.

To be clear, drunkenness is a sin, but not drinking.  Alcohol has been the official drink of Christianity for 2,000 years.  Smoking is not a sin, but is probably unwise, and so probably should be avoided.  Now a good pipe now and then, well, that’s a gift from God and should be enjoyed heartily.

The Bad

Only a couple of lines here that need to be discussed.

First, Toby claims that “God with bring her to me so I don’t have to search.”  This sort of “Let go and let God” philosophy has been around for a while, but it’s not biblical.  We are called to wisdom as Christians, and often that wisdom will lead us to action.  We see the examples of the patriarch in the Bible, for example.  Abraham actively sent for a wife for his son, and later, we see Jacob make a similar himself.  They did not sit in the Promised Land and wait.  We are called to be wise and responsible, to seek the good.  Oddly enough, the Proverbs themselves teach us to seek a wife in 18:22, “He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord.”

Now, wisdom may call us to hold off for a time, or that the person we are with is not the right one.  This requires prayer and godly counsel.  But generally, we are called to seek a good wife.  (Or husband.)

Next, DC Talk tells us that “When I finally meet her, I’ll know how to treat her, but fulfilling all her needs.”  Good luck with that one!  This is the sort of nonsense that single people say before they get married, and it’s a statement made of ignorance or pride.  The truth is that we do our best, but it is Christ who fulfills all of our needs, not our spouses.  Marriages built on this sort of wishful thinking are going to be rocky.

Lastly, they say they will “cherish her forever.”  Not really sure what’s behind this one.  There is a sense where it is likely true that we will cherish our Christian brothers and sisters forever.  However, not as man and wife.  Jesus teaches us in Matthew 22:30 that marriage is a temporary thing, not carried with us in the resurrection.  The vagueness of the line makes me a little nervous here.

Overall

All things considered, we have a pretty solid tune here.  There are song lines I take issue with, but oddly, they all come in the same bridge.  The other verses are commendable.  I say good job to the boys of DCT.  The song is basically on solid ground.

Island of Grace (2010)

I’ve started a series on DC Talk’s Free at Last, but we’re going to interject a movie review here, because

this movie is an illustration of exactly why I started this blog.

It seems that the Christian movie world, much like the Christian music world, most often runs to cliché and vague “spiritual-sounding” lines rather than dealing with theological meat.  Well, we cannot blame the film-makers completely for that.  I’m sure a movie explaining Reformed theology would be a flop, while something that is just vaguely “Christianish” would do fairly well.  After all, Hollywood runs to the lowest common denominator all the time, but then Hollywood does not purport to answer to any higher authority besides themselves, while we do.

And there is a second difference between that Christian art should be and what Hollywood does.  An action film does not attempt to do much else besides entertain us.  A feel-good romantic comedy shoots squarely at the emotions, and so it doesn’t have to be more than ankle deep.  But if we are to make a movie that hopes to draw us closer to God, it should present a God that is distinguishable from any generic false god the world has created.

Which brings us to Island of Grace.  There’s nothing particularly wrong with this production, besides the acting.  The script isn’t bad, the pacing and tension fairly decent.  Why, it is even “Dove Family Approved.”

The problem here is that the understanding of God is so vague that it could quite easily be the Muslim or Mormon god that they are talking about.

But wait.  It is.

Island of Grace is really a repackaged Mormon film called Rescued with only a few scenes changed (I would direct you to this Mormon site for the specific changes, though their conclusions are obviously wrong).

They have literally taken a Mormon movie, changed a couple of lines and scenes, and called it Christian.  And it’s not the only movie they’ve double-released like that.  This particular media outlet has figured out that they can make more money with their Mormon films by changing some lines and convincing Christians that they are talking about the true God rather than the Mormon one.

Which isn’t a comment about them.  Mormons these days tend to think that they are Christian, and so this group probably thinks they are just helping merge the groups.  It is a comment on us.  When we have accepted such drivel and think it to be honoring to our God, we have set ourselves up to be fooled by false ones.

If you’re wondering why I’m doing this site – this is the reason.  Our art has become so bad and watered down that we watch a movie about a false god and think that it is about the true one.  We need to change, and we need to demand better.  I’ll say this – God demands better, and if we are going to honor God, then we need to get to know Him better.  This site is designed to call us out on this point and ask that we step up our game a little.  No more Mormon gods in disguise – we worship the true God.

"Luv is a Verb" by DC Talk

Song: “Luv is a Verb”

Artist: DC Talk

Album: Free at Last (1992)

Track: 1

I cannot overstate to you how much this song influenced me musically.  Growing up, we typically listened to soft adult-contemporary Christian music with my mom or early 60s Rock with my dad.  Whatever 80s and early 90s music I had heard by that point had only been overheard.  My parents at last let me get a DC Talk album because we read about the Christian rap movement in some Christian magazine, but Nu Thang wasn’t all that musically advanced.  Granted, it was advanced for me, since I hadn’t really listened to any music that was really good recorded after 1965, but it wasn’t really groundbreaking.  There was a massive musical leap between that album and this one, and when I heard this for the first time, I was blown away, and it had no small role to play in my musical development.

But we’re not here to look at the music.  We’re here to check out the theology.

The Good

Without doing research outside of the song itself, it appears that this song draws mostly out of 1 John.  The focus here is how we show love.  And that love must be shown, not merely spoken.  The whole story about being surprised to see that the word “love” is a verb is effective, if rather inaccurate (love can also be a noun).

The third verse is particular good here.  I appreciate the part of about love not being “all that stuff that you see on T.V.”  That is a good reminder for the very young Christian, which is assumedly the target audience.

Neither Good nor Bad

One thing that this song does that the album as a whole does is put the focus squarely on DC Talk.  It starts out with a chant “Down with the DC Talk.”  It would be a minor point except that we start seeing theological problems coming through ego later down the road, so it should be pointed out and exposed here too.  It does not present a theological problem yet, but we should note that the focus is off a little.

In addition, DC Talk has a habit of loading their lyrics full of witty phrasings and hip hop lingo, but not with actual substance.  It’s frustrating, because the primary advantage that rap has over other forms of song is the ability to load it up with far more words than anything else.  But DC Talk squanders those words, and while Toby is a very good rapper, it doesn’t appear that he has much to say.

The Bad

There is a major theological flaw in this song, and one that should cause a great deal of concern.  The lyrics go thusly:  “Luv is enough if it's unconditionally given, now you're living out the Great Commission.”

Uh-oh.  That’s a problem.  They could mean one of those things here, but neither one are right.  The first possible meaning is that God gave his love unconditionally, so we’re living out the Great Commission.  Well, the Great Commission is, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20), so there seems to be a missing step somewhere in there.

The more likely meaning behind the lyric (since the song is about our love, not the Father’s) is that we live out the Great Commission by loving unconditionally.  Which is not the Great Commission at all, and neither is it something we ever really do. 

And it is with this line that they take a song about living a Christian life in love for one another and step into a massive confusion about what the Gospel is and how it is spread.  The Gospel is not something we accomplish through our love, but is accomplished by God on our behalf.  And while it is loving to go into the world and tell about the Gospel, the only perfect love here is His, and we should repent always for our lack of love.

Which brings up my second problem with the song.  There’s no Gospel here.  I believe the song is based on 1 John, which is primarily about how we are to love one another, but 1 John does not abandon us when we stumble here, but instead tells us that “if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (2:1).  We are constantly cast back to the source of our righteousness in the epistle.  Not so here.  We are cast back to the dictionary in this song and told to love perfectly.

Which is something I have failed at on a daily basis.  So DC Talk’s message isn’t really seeming that hopeful to me.  Instead, it just makes me feel inadequate.

Overall

There is only just a little theology in this song, despite all the lyrics, and what theology is there is more tainted by the bad than overcome with the good.  The opening track to Free at Last leaves much to be desires.

Can we get the ad hominem attacks out of the way, please?

I’ve never had a “discernment” blog before, but I’ve been to enough of them to know what to expect.  There are certain people who just don’t think this is a valid expression of the faith.  I would clearly disagree, and I would argue that from Scripture.  I hope you would do the same with me.  That discussion is welcomed here.

But then there are other reactions that are actually ad hominem attacks.  This is a Latin phrase that means, “Against the man.”  It’s a logical facility where you cast doubt on point the person is making by attacking the person directly.  For example, my buddy Frank says, “I think Senator Joe Blow makes a good point when he says that taxes are too high,” and I respond with, “Yeah, well Senator Blow cheats on his wife!”

Well, that may be true that Senator Blow cheats on his wife.  It doesn’t mean that his point about taxes are too high is wrong.  My statement is ad hominem and is fallacious.

So we’re going to get the major one out of the way now so I don’t have to respond to them over and over again as we go.

You’re just a hater.

Actually, I’m a lover.  That’s why I’m doing this.  There is a place for loving criticism, and I hope you would agree with that statement, because you just criticized me.  So if offering any criticism whatsoever is just being a “hater,” when welcome to the club, my friend!

You live in your mother’s basement, eating Cheetos, sleeping on Star Wars sheets, and all you do is sit behind a computer all day and snap at people.

Star Wars sheets would be awesome!  The wife won’t let me get them.  Yes, I have asked.  Otherwise, I own a house, I have a job, and I prefer Sun Chips.  I do sit behind a computer all day, but it’s at work, not for blogs.

You’re being divisive!

This is one of those accusations that rest more on the accuser than on me, since in opposing my writing, you are being divisive too.  But being divisive is not necessarily a sin.  After all, Jesus did not come to bring peace, but a sword.  The question is, are we dividing over truth, or something petty?  I personally think the people who are spouting bad theology and false Gospels are terribly divisive, but those who come to correct the doctrine and set people on the right path are very loving.

Why don’t you try to do better if you know everything?

It is not a precondition to point out theological errors in a film that I produce a film of my own.  I think I would actually enjoy doing that, but I don’t have the money or time.  I am a musician though.  I teach guitar, and I perform at certain church functions, hopefully to the edification of the Body.  I hope to be releasing some tracks in the near future.  I will post those here, and I would encourage you to do a biblical critique of them, and of all Christian music you listen to.  We are called to be discerning, after all!

If you do a critique of my stuff, let me know about it!  I want to make sure my own music and writing is faithful to my Lord and Savior.

In addition, I do have some books out, with more coming soon.  One is theological, but others of my novels are “mainstream.”  That being said, I do try to interweave themes consistent with the Christian worldview in my novels, so I would invite critique of those as well.  I do not want to be advocating values contrary to Scripture, even in books that are not necessarily “Christian.”

You just criticize what others believe!  You only tear down!  You never build up!

I hope my posts will prove you wrong on this one.  I do want to give a positive case for good doctrine while explaining why bad doctrine is bad.  As to what I believe, I am Reformed, and I subscribe to the Westminster Standards.  If you read them, you will have a very thorough understanding of what I believe.

People like you would rather criticize the church than take part in it!

Now, I think this is a topic we should all actually consider very carefully.  It is absolutely true that there are people out there that are not members of a local church, who do not submit to an elder of the church, who are not involved in the Body of Christ, but still throw stones at her.  This is sinful and unacceptable, and those people should repent for the forgiveness of sins in Christ Jesus.  I pray that I do not become one of these.

I am a member in good standing at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Houston, Texas.  I am very involved there.  My elders all know me and keep up with my family to make sure we are doing okay.

You’re wrong!

Let me know how by using Scripture and plain reason, and we can discuss.

What is this? Who are you? How did I get here??!?!

I grew up in the 80s, but didn’t grow up on 80s music.  My father listened to Oldies, and my mother to CCM – Contemporary Christian Music.  My first introduction into more modern music was DC Talk, and when I went to see them in concert, I discovered a little-known band (at the time) called the Newsboys.  My first four CDs ever were DC Talk, Newsboys, the Beatles, and the Monkees.  This is what I was listening to.

All the music I listened to until High School was either Oldies or Christian.  This is the stuff I grew up on.  But it never occurred to be to actually test what was being taught in these songs.

By the way, this is exactly what we are expected to do.  The Bereans tested Paul’s teaching and they were commended for it.  Keep in mind what I just said – they were testing Paul’s teaching.  Paul the Apostle.  The guy who was writing the Bible.  If they are commended for testing Paul, then we should doubly be testing modern musicians and writers.