I have some pretty strong feelings about movies.  I love film, and I eagerly look forward to being involved in it.  I don't really want to write reviews, just share my thoughts.

So, I thought I'd do some fun posts about some of my favorites.

Obviously, SPOILERS.

Now please, don't slam your laptop shut in a fit of Anti-Micheal Bay rage because I used the words "Transformers 3" and "favorite" in the same blog post.

If you ask me, and (hopefully) and of my close friends, it could probably be said that I have pretty good taste in movies.  I try not to be too much of a typical millennial, but it's true, I do prefer newer movies and sometimes I just like what I like, but I try to have a really good, story-driven reason for it.

So yeah, it's true, Transformers: Dark of the Moon is one of my favorite movies, but I promise I can defend that position and still keep your respect.  At least, I hope so.  Besides, it was a MUCH BETTER movie than Revenge of the Fallen.

This is one of those movies that, more often than not, gets torn to shreds by people who have regular conversations about film.  Not to mention all of the anger on the IMDB reviews page.  So let me go ahead and get the negatives out of way, at least where my taste is concerned.

As I understand it, Bay is pretty notorious for the way he films females, and I have to say, I don't approve of that sort of thing.  Enough said about that.  Also, there is a lot of dodgy sexual dialogue/situational humor that is obviously made to appeal to an internet-saturated demographic.  I'm not a stick in the mud, but I feel like a lot of this humor was just uncomfortable and unneeded, especially when other parts of the script are genuinely funny.  The character of Jerry Wang is pretty hilarious, but I didn't need to see him straddling Sam in a stall while spitting out bizarre one-liners any more than I wanted to see a pervy little robot attaching itself to the female lead's leg.

Oh yeah, and that place that Carly is supposed to be working at in DC....that's in Milwaukee.  It's a museum.  I've been there, and it's cool.  But it's not in DC.

Moving on to the things I really like about this movie though.  I'll be honest, the second half of the movie far outshines the first.  The first half of the movie feels like mostly awkward humor and teen pandering, but the second half feels like a meaningful war/adventure movie. Having said that, first of all, I really like BIG things, especially when there is a good reason for them.  If there are big emotions, and big ideas involved, then bring on the theatrics.  It's pointless violence or unfounded visual-effects that I find offputting, but I don't find that to be the case with this movie.  A lot of people have complained that they aren't into all that huge explosions and grand CGI spectacle stuff, and sometimes that's totally a legitimate argument (in the case of storyless movies that are essentially just stunts), but this is a Transformers movie.  I mean, what were you expecting?  "Seven Tons: The story of Bumblebee and his introspective journey to donate his internal parts to those that need them most before he dies of a rare Cybertronian virus"? And when it just cuts to the city suffering under the thumb of a Decepticon invasion, or when Ironhide is powerfully hewing his way through the baddies, I want to see it in all of its operatic glory.  Plus, it completely lends itself to the seriousness of the movie's main themes and emotional content.  "What emotional content?" a lot of people seem to be arguing, but a lot of things in this one hit home for me, so let's get to that in just a moment.  I just want to add that, as a visual artist myself, the visual effects in this movie are beautiful, as far as character design and depth of development go.  The ships, the props, the level of detail is astounding.

The movie opens with Sam Witwicky essentially feeling condemned to the bottom wrung of ladder-climbing.  His direct quote really sums it up, “I’ve done s*** that matters and I’d kind of like a job where I matter again.”.  This was the first part of the movie that really, really got me emotionally.  Maybe it's because I've felt this way more than once in my own life, but it just seemed so painfully identifiable.  He's got all these people looking at him like he's chopped liver, when he knows his life about more, when he knows he's done more than he has the time or the freedom to sit around and explain, and the Autobots are out there living the adventure he was once a part of.  He's fresh out of college, and it's time to get a "big boy job", as if saving the world was something that should only garner a pat on the back before he's sent out into obscurity.  This is a huge character development, if you ask me.  He has to deal with what he knows he is made for and what the world expects him to be, but couldn't possibly understand.  So much so that, for a while, even the people who should listen to him, don't.  Not to mention that he's dealing with feelings of inadequacy.  Ironic, that he's adequate enough to save the world, but feels thrown into the role of "less than" errand boy in the land of the....regular people.

There is also what feels like a really good terrorism analogy in this film.  The people of earth literally send away their heroes because they don't believe in them anymore, succumbing to the bad guys' demands, and it almost costs them everything.  Their compromise to fear and the demands of the bad guys is their biggest mistake.  That's why there had to be the giant carnage and spectacle that a Bay film begs for.  It was a part of the message.  Not to mention that on a personal level, we've got Carly's boss who has made a personal deal with the enemy for his own gain.  And the Decepticons are relentless.  They execute the good guys in broad daylight, and Sentinel Prime's betrayal even spells the end of the beloved and infinitely hardcore Ironhide.  If nothing else, that moment proves just how serious things are.  They try to negotiate with bad guys who have nothing but selfish and evil intentions, and it brings along tragedy, and lots and lots of death.  There's just something about that idea of people sending away their heroes that gets to me on some really deep level.  I can rarely watch the movie without getting choked up every time I watch that shuttle take off into orbit.  Don't judge me.  Everyone has their reasons for compromising with the enemy, and most of those reasons have to do with fear and giving up hope.  They think they can just send the Autobots off into the cosmos, but when the ship explodes, I think that's when the gravity of the situation comes falling down onto the people of earth.  They finally see who they are dealing with, and as far as they know, their best hope of survival just got turned into carbon.

I also really just love the character of Optimus Prime.  I love heroes, and Prime is a great one.  He's a leader with a great moral compass, that can still tear apart the enemy on the battlefield.  These days, it feels like people think that being a real "good guy" as opposed to an antihero is mutually exclusive to being a force to be reckoned with, and I like that Prime shatters that expectation.  When Chicago is turning to ruin, and there are just a few dedicated people fighting back, and Prime reappears from being supposedly dead and puts a shotgun slug into into a Decepticon pilot, proclaiming "We will kill them all.", you know his isn't there to pansy around and negotiate with the enemy.  And I love that.  It's not like he hasn't tried diplomacy.  It isn't like he hasn't let Megatron live despite everything up to this point, but that time has passed.  I think the people who say this movie isn't about character aren't considering the Autobots to be characters.  Prime has to make a lot of hard decisions throughout, and when he decides it's "time to find out" what he would be like without Megatron, you know that despite the full conviction, this wasn't something that was taken lightly.  It's even hard to watch, because on one hand, heroes aren't supposed to be executioners, but on the other, this is war.  And the absolute flare and attitude with which the Autobots fight the Decepticons makes the action feel that much more satisfying.

To add potency to all that, I have to say that the voice acting for Optimus, Sentinel, and Megatron (most of the Cybertronians in general) just tops off the sweetness of the bravado pie for me.  Yes, there is a lot of dialogue that, on paper, must have looked somewhat campy.  But Peter Cullen's voice talent (combined with the audio effect savvy of the sound engineers and designers) and execution took it from that all the way what, for me, was a beautiful, manly brand of grandiose. Optimus and Megatron's verbal jousting was pretty epic.  Especially since it was all in relatively subdued and controlled tones, contrasting the absolute beating they were throwing at each other onscreen.  They fought like dogs, but practically argued like Britons.  The language helped separate the big, romantic, heroic moments of the battles from the quick-lipped meta-humor of the movie's other moments.  If anything, the writing was a neat study in contrasts.  But back to the voice acting, it's all pretty spot on, even just the gutteral battle-cries and grunts of the mechanized combatants. 

And something has to be said about Steve Jablonsky's score.  I once heard an interview with Hans Zimmer about the making of the music for Inception.  I believe the term he used was "vulgar", when referring to what usually happens when someone uses an electric guitar in an orchestral score, which is why he had done so with such delicate care and attention to detail in Inception.  I feel like Jablonsky approached this score with the same type of gravity (ok ok, except for the abusive use of pop music in a few places.  But honestly, some of that worked too).  But what I mean is that, Jablonsky's themes are big, epic, and accessible.  The pulsing strings, the the swelling choirs and horns.  When he does work in more modern elements, he's basically playing off of the Linkin Park sound that the series attached itself to, which works great with a movie about space robots anyway, but it's still subtle and appropriate enough to not feel gaudy or steal from how majestic the overall vibe is.  The music is what part of what makes Optimus' dialogue so effective.

And the audio engineer in me has to say something about the sound design.  The layered sounds of the transformations (how much is synthesized and how much is sampled, it's hard to tell), to the little details like the creaks and whirrs when a bot takes a knee, must have taken many hours to compile and apply, but they really shine during the battles.  Whoever created and mixed these did a great job maintaining a bassy, weighty girth in the sounds, even when it came to the treatment of the effects on that actor's voices. 

Those are the biggest reasons for me, but here's a couple side-notes too.

People have argued that Carly's character is completely useless and unneeded.  I tend to disagree.  Most of these arguments are based on the assertion that she was just eye-candy meant to pull the boys into the theater.  However, look at what the writers do here.  They create a character in Carly that offsets Mikaela, Megan Fox's character from the previous films.  Where Mikaela is this rough-and-tumble sort of bad-girl, Carly is a bit more professional, (which sadly is easy to miss, because of the way Bay chose to visually.....well, you know, in a few places).  She prefers for Sam's stories to STAY stories, which feels extremely disappointing (you kind of want to punch her in the arm and call her a wimp), because it's more fun to see the female lead jump into the action, but it's a legitmate point of view, and a pretty believable one at that (let's face it, it takes a lot of guts to even hang out in the same neighborhood as two giant fighting robots, much less mouth off to one).  However, her moment is when she essentially manipulates Megatron into turning on Sentinel.  It kind of made me go, "Oh, ok, but she's clever.  That's the character's strong point."  People like to knock on the fact that Rosie Huntington-Whiteley is primarily a model and not an actress, and it's true that she spends a lot of the movie either looking stunned or screaming.  However, I watched the film again recently, and as an actor myself, tried to really look at her performance in the more character-driven scenes between her and Shia LaBeouf (I.E. in the conversations in the offices).  And you know what?  I actually thought she did pretty good.  The banter was fun and believable, the conversations didn't seem forced.  It could be that she isn't a very good actress, but if that's the case, the editing must have hidden it pretty well.  And aside from the whole, "I don't want to be hardcore and fight the evil robots" thing, I liked this character's personality better.  She's not very dynamic, but still, more likable.

Some have also knocked on Bay's pretty blatant patriotism.  To this, I feel like a pretty direct "Oh, shut it" is in order.  It a day where a lot of people like to act like they need to apologize for being Americans, I think it takes some guts to be patriotic, especially when it's not really considered "cool" anymore.  And one thing I tip my proverbial hat to is the reverence with which Bay portrays the active duty military.  I can respect that, and I sort of wish more people would.

I think that Prime's monologue at the end really sums things up well.

"In any war there are calms between storms.  There will be days when we lose faith, days when our allies turn against us.  But the day will never come when we forsake this planet and its people."


So that's why I like Transformers 3. 

I pose a question!  What are your thoughts in today's live-tweeting world of musicians?  Do you like it?  Or does it steal from the mystique?  Comment!

Wealth status and success are hot-button issues.  Now, as you know, this "Christian Misconceptions" series of blogs is not exclusively for Christians or Non-Christians, and I've seen and heard things from both groups regarding how Christians, or even people in general, ought to live, usually based on some skewed religious outlook.  We hear statements all the time like,
"Money is the root of all evil"
"Jesus was poor, so you should be too!"
Some times these statements are based in spite, other times they are based in good intentions.  There's a general feel that you shouldn't have "too much" (something that's hardly quantifiable), because instead, you should be giving it away.  But I submit to you that the more prosperous we are, the more we can sustainably do more good for more people.  I also submit to you that God is big enough for us to have what most people would call "too much" and still do more good for others than the naysayers ever will, even those who spend their lives giving things away to avoid having "too much".

First of all, let's respond to the common statement I just mentioned.  Here is the scripture that people like to use, from the American Standard Version. 
It's 1 Timothy 6:10
"10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil: which some reaching after have been led astray from the faith, and have pierced themselves through with many sorrows."

This scripture does not say that money is the root of all kinds of evil, it says the LOVE OF MONEY is.  Total difference.  And this scripture is obviously referring to people who will do anything to get it, even at the expense of their faith and values.

And as for the second statement, here's the scripture it's sort of taken from in the Amplified:
2 Corinthians 8
9 For you are becoming progressively acquainted with and recognizing more strongly and clearly the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ (His kindness, His gracious generosity, His undeserved favor and spiritual blessing), [in] that though He was [so very] rich, yet for your sakes He became [so very] poor, in order that by His poverty you might become enriched (abundantly supplied).

There are two things to note here.  The first is that Jesus became poor in a relative sense, since he gave up Heaven for a while and came to earth.  He was NOT dirt poor while he was on the earth (and I'll prove it in a moment), but compared to Heaven, earth just can't compare.
The second thing to note is how many people quote half of this verse.  It quite literally says that this sacrifice was so we "...might become enriched".  Well.  How about that?

So I want to present you a few scenarios that I think illustrate the problems that come from believing the lie that we are supposed to be poor, or rather, that we aren't supposed to be rich.
You know the scenes. And yeah, there are multiple ones.

Let me start off by saying, NOTHING that follows is meant to be an insult in different stages of life and development.  I'm just trying to be honest and candid.  Also, I believe in giving, and I think it's something we should all do.  Now, on to the matter at hand. 

Scenario 1-The Christian band.  On the chance that they are ready for success and big exposure, they basically speak against it.  They don't believe that they can receive prosperity from God, so they almost seem to write it off as something you have to sell your soul to get, which they'll never do.  The industry at large seems to just accept that these artists will never be as big as a Justin Bieber, Taylor Swift, or Black-Eyed Peas, and so the artists do too, and on some level, they take pride in that.  They try to stay away from things like "fame" and even see it as a dirty word.  But if you really believe that what you have to say is worth as many others experiencing and hearing as possible, isn't that, in some way, fame? 
And if you don't believe that, then why take a single promo picture or even give your band a name?  Why not just anonymously release music through shadow aliases on the internet, because, you know, "to God be all the glory"?!  Gets convoluted really fast, doesn't it?  And do I believe "to God be all the glory"?  Yes!  But He's glorified through the great things he does through his people, but too often we've been told, directly or indirectly, that we shouldn't go for or have or do "great things".  How many people have been cheated out of hearing something positive that would have helped them in life because of this?

There's something to be said about learning to do good business.  Christians, we need to be prosperous to do good business, and to be the kind of people others want to associate with, or aspire to be like.  Do your best to pay people what they're worth, and find the difference between being generous and underselling yourself.  Most kids don't want to be like an artist who can't keep up their gear or who begs for gas money at shows and online "because the royalties just aren't enough, because the Christian industry really isn't that big".  They want to be like Lil' Wayne.  And truth be told, it's people like him, with money and influence, who have affected the culture (and I'm saying that as a neutral statement, not a slam against him, just a fact).  Too often Christian artists take pride in being some sort of "barefooted traveler", which just reflects their less-than-accurate mental picture of Christ.  So frankly?  The end result is that a lot of people "in the world" who you're "trying to reach" don't want to be anything like you, or your poor God.

It's true, Christians are to be in the world, but not of it, according to scripture.  It's true that Christians shouldn't do everything like the world, and at the end of the day, yes, that will separate you from some people.  But truthfully, in not doing things "like the world", you should do it better, and often, we have not.  There's almost something to be said when a "faith-based" band can be on Christian radio in exclusive clubs and hip churches all over the country, but the kid who lives 25 miles from them who listens to Linkin Park 4 hours a day hasn't the foggiest idea who they are. 

And it's true that the "Christian Industry" is a place full of all kinds of people, and it has done great things.  Really.  But I think Christians in general would do so much greater things in every industry if we just believed that God wants, even NEEDS us to be prosperous. 

I think the worst part of it is, the intentions are good, but the information isn't.

Now, dear reader, don't go assuming.  I've played for a crowd of 3 before, when the band was 7 people.  I've played for nearly empty rooms before, and I've played in front of hundreds.  I've given away a lot of music, and I earnestly believe in giving to others and to good causes.  My goal here isn't to disparage the "working musician".  It's to paint a picture of lack of balance, not lack of good intentions. 

2-You're chilling with your amigos, and by some slip of the hand the TV remote glides past a station airing a preacher.  Someone uses the word "televangelist" or "megachurch" and an immediate, predictable dialogue ensues.  Words like "crook"  get used, someone cites some unfortunate truth about ministers who have really cheated good people out of their money, but this has tainted their view ever since.  If you're in a really special situation, one of the people in the room is really religious and pulls out the "filthy lucre" one-liner.  And it eventually gets topped off with the oh-so-common "Besides, do you know about all the good they could do for others with all that money?!  Because, "God forbid they drive that nice car or live in that big house when so many people are hurting around the world."  The overall rationale is that, it makes sense for celebrities or talking heads to be rich, but preachers aren't supposed to be.  People of God aren't supposed to be rich.  Because that's somewhere in the Bible, right?

And that last statement becomes the source of fear and disparagement for all kinds of people.  Repute and money become things you not only aren't sure aren't "evil", but they're things you're afraid of being ridiculed for.

But ok, now, hang on. 

What do you make of Genesis 12:2 then?  Where God says the following to Abraham?

"2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you [with abundant increase of favors] and make your name famous and distinguished, and you will be a blessing [dispensing good to others]."

What do you make of the fact that Solomon was one of the richest men in history?  Or the fact that Jesus was brought fine expensive gifts from kings upon his birth, and later on in life, had his own treasurer?  Oh yeah, Judas, that was his job.  And what do you make of the accounts in Matthew 26 and John 12 where a woman puts perfume on Jesus, the value of which was a year's wages.  Check out what Judas, (yeah, THE Judas) says:

"4 But Judas Iscariot, the one of His disciples who was about to betray Him, said,

5 Why was this perfume not sold for 300 denarii [a year’s wages for an ordinary workman] and that [money] given to the poor (the destitute)?

6 Now he did not say this because he cared for the poor but because he was a thief; and having the bag (the money box, the purse of the Twelve), he took for himself what was put into it [pilfering the collections]."

Hrm.  Well, looks like Jesus didn't have a problem with expensive things.  And he obviously had enough money to be providing for 12 full-time employees, giving to the poor, AND overlooking Judas' nasty habit. 

It is my firm belief that money isn't evil.  And neither is fame.  They're just amplifiers of who you are, and Christians, you can relax, they are things that you can use wholeheartedly for God, as long as you keep selfishness out of the way.  That's not always easy, and it is a big responsibility, but we were never expected to take that responsibility alone.  The Bible makes it clear that we are not to go loving money or fame, making them our main focus and becoming self-absorbed or absorbed in the pursuit.  Still, God said he would make Abraham famous.  Why?  Because the more ACTUAL RESULTS and repute Abraham got, the more people would not only see that his God was real, but that Abraham was into something that they would want to get in on too. 

Let me turn on a lightbulb for you.  KIDS DON'T WANT TO BE LIKE THAT POOR MUSICIAN WHO DOESN'T SHOWER AND IS BARELY MAKING IT!  They know the Grammys.  They want to be like Taylor Swift or Will Smith or some rapper who goes home to a nice house every day with a front gate.  And you know what?  Once upon a time that was Abraham.  That was Solomon.  Boyeee.

And before you go about criticizing that dreaded televangelist, let me tell you, there are a LOT of things about some of the stuff on 'Christian TV" I don't like.  I don't like it when people try to buy you off by selling you packets of "Holy Water" (Catholics, that's not a slam at you, you aren't trying to sell the stuff).  I don't like it when people more or less beg me for my money to stay on the air.  A lot of the same stuff that you find distasteful, I do too.

But there are ministries run by really rich people who got there by trusting and following God.  People who have nice things and nice houses, but do a TON more for the poor at home and around the world than you probably ever have.  I'd rather be one of those people.

Scenario 3-You're hanging around watching a movie with your bros.  You get into it, and you begin to notice a trend in film.  The good guy is a relatively poor guy, and the bad guy is some filthy-rich meiser.

It's true, this is that case a lot of the time, but it's almost as if we expect successful people to be evil.  The love of money may be evil, but money isn't.  And greed isn't exclusive to rich people.  A lot of "lower class" or "middle class" people can be among the greediest.  Greed isn't determined by how much you have.  I don't have a problem with this scenario playing out in our fiction to a point, since, as I said, many times it happens that way.  I just think that we need to remember that it doesn't HAVE to ALWAYS be that way. 

So, I think I'll just top it off by saying this:  Focus on knowing the truth.  Focus on being the type of person that, amplified, will just amplify the truth.  Money, notoriety, they're just amplifiers.  They're only as good or bad as what they're being used for, but if we're told to throw everything away, how can we be expected to sustainably do good?  I believe that you can learn things from the Bible and put them into practice and receive prosperity from God in every area of life.  I'm not saying that we need to become over-thinking, over-working, money-obsessed business people.  No, not at all.  But I'm saying that we need not be afraid of being blessed either, so that we can show what you're ACTUALLY supposed to do with it. 

Hi everyone, I just wanted to let you know about a really unique concert I am a part of next week.
Well, first of all, I guess I should let you know that I am playing a cool solo set at next week's outdoor Thursday Night Live at the ArtStreet Ampitheater at UD.  April 25th, 8pm, free ;)

But anyway, as indicated by the title of the blog, I have written four arrangements for the Dayton Jazz Ensemble of my own original material.  It's really interesting, because two of the songs are more pop/ballad, but the other two are pretty heavy!  Writing these arrangements for a jazz big band was a lot of work, but I'm really happy with how they came out.  We'll be playing The Roses, The Eyes, Days Like These, and Igniter.  For the ballads, I had to write new material into the songs to open them up for the many voices in the jazz band, and I there's even an open solo section.  For the heavier songs, it was part composition, and part transcription.  Igniter is one of those songs that I am REALLY excited about, but not a lot of people have heard it, because it hasn't yet really been released in recorded form yet and has only been performed once live.  It's heavy, and laced with orchestral and synth parts, which had to be written over for live horns.  And that's where the fun starts. 

We'll be fusing my band with UD's top big band to bring this really cool hybrid experience right in the middle of the Jazz Band's concert at UD's Boll Theater, next Friday, April the 26th at 7pm.  The concert is free, so come check this out!

By the way, I'm opening the comments on this one, so feel free to ask me about this experience!

I figured I’d open this one up with a double-header statement, mostly because these two ideas have become synonymous these days.

“The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” and the idea that God brings us things like sickness and tragedy to teach us a lesson have pretty much gone hand in hand for many years, skipping down the street like a pair of hyper-destructive, bizarro wonder twins that blissfully sprinkle rose petals reeking of hypocrisy for people to pick up and blame God for. 

Start blog with ridiculous, but nevertheless reader-intriguing imagery: check.

“But seriously, folks” (in my best vaudeville voice).  Now, these things have been said by really well-meaning people.  And you may be wondering, Sam, why open up this can, dude?  If you want to be a Christian artist, just talk about people’s life situations and tell them you’ve been through them too in some lyrical way.  Tell them there’s an answer for it, but that you don’t know what it is, because that’d be presumptuous.  Pick a 3rd world country and tell your fans you’re going to send water or something.  But really, this theological stuff?  How’s that supposed to work for PR?  And you want to affect and work in the secular market?  How you going to get in there with blog posts about God?  Oh, so I suppose I should just decide to campaign about meat being murder in my vegatable-fueled tour bus or write for the political hatred of disgruntled fifteen year olds, because that’s so much less “edgy” or “risky” or “niche market”?  Seriously?  Why is it that some people see talking about Christianity as so much riskier than wearing a meat dress?  I’m not trying to insult anyone who does any of these things, I celebrate their right to free speech, I’m just challenging the “understood” double standard surrounding Christianity.

At any rate, as I said before, people have meant well when they said these things.  But I want to be real, and brave, and substantial enough to look at the harder questions.  And, I should be comfortable enough in my relationship with God to ASK those “harder” questions.  For many, I think they just believe it’d be insubordination to ask the Lord honest questions, and then they teach from that perspective, but if you ask me, that’s not much of a relationship.  Some tend to want to argue that God doesn’t care about our personal little quandries because he’s “got bigger things to worry about”, but here’s one thing you’ll hear me say over and over; I want judge things based on the Bible.  So the aforementioned statement above doesn’t compute.  How could God NOT care about our questions and even the small details of our lives when Matthew ch. 10 says, “ 29 What is the price of two sparrows—one copper coin[k]? But not a single sparrow can fall to the ground without your Father knowing it. 30 And the very hairs on your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are more valuable to God than a whole flock of sparrows.” 

So in this time when we’ve had school shootings and a hundred other terrible things people want to debate about on the internet, we’ve had people throwing about these religious statements, which has really just miffed others more where God is concerned.  And the obvious question becomes, “Well, why would I ever serve a God like THAT?”  You know something?  THAT is a great question.  Because I probably wouldn’t want to either.

The best way to learn about the personality of God is to look at the Bible.  First off, yes, it’s true that we view the Bible as penned by the Holy Spirit through the hands of many inspired authors, but one thing I was always told is that when you read it, you have to consider who is saying what, and toward whom it is directed.  So here, let’s focus on that whole statement, “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” for this blog.  Uh yeah, that’s in the Bible, but GOD DIDN’T SAY IT. 

Yerp.  How about that?  Actually, it was said by Job right after a ton of terrible things happened to him.  In Job 1, “20 At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship 21 and said:

“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
    and naked I will depart.[c]
The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away;
    may the name of the Lord be praised.”

22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.”

Well hey Sam, look!  It says Job didn’t sin by charging God with wrongdoing!  That means he was right! 

Not quite.  Now, don’t you think that if I was scared, I’d have just left that verse out?  But no, it’s there, so let’s address it.  To really find the answer to this, we have to look at the whole Bible, and not just one or two verses of scripture.  We have to look at what God says about Himself, and we have to know the context that this scripture is talking about in terms of sin.  And we have to remember that this stuff is translated from Hebrew.

First of all, how did all this crazy stuff happen to Job?  Why?  Well, it had nothing to do with God wanting it to happen.  Job chapter 3 tells how “the thing Job greatly feared had come upon him”.  He was living in the Old Covenant, an imperfect system that even God was working to change (which was what Jesus was all about, FYI).  Job was continually offering the same sacrifice over and over out of fear for sins his family might commit.  This was a breach in his faith, it was based in an attitude of fear, and according to how sacrifices worked, this was wrong altogether.

So yeah, enter Satan (oh dear Sam, did you just say Satan on the internet?), well, yeah, Satan, da debbil, appears at the beginning of Job, complaining to God about how PROTECTED AND BLESSED Job was.  But Job’s act of fear was Satan’s foot in the door.  It was the crack in his protection.  Satan was telling God “if I do this stuff to him, he’ll curse you!”  And Job never cursed God.  His wife did though,

Job 2

9 His wife said to him, “Are you still maintaining your integrity? Curse God and die!”

Now, despite the fact that Job continues to see these things as coming from God, God himself says otherwise IN THE BOOK OF JOB.

Job 2

6 The Lord said to Satan, “Very well, then, he is in your hands; but you must spare his life.”

So, the Lord said that Job was in the hands of the devil (at least, to some extent) , not God, because Job had taken himself out of the full protection of God through his act of fear.  NOT because God wanted bad things to happen to Job, but God was bound by spiritual law in the matter.  However, Job was still God’s dedicated guy and wouldn’t curse him, which was why he couldn’t be killed altogether.

Now, instead of taking it from Job’s mouth, why don’t we look at what GOD actually SAYS ABOUT HIMSELF and Satan.  This is Jesus speaking in John 10:10

“10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”  Well, that on it’s own seems pretty definitive, right?

So what does Job 1:22 mean when it says that Job didn’t sin? 

Well, again, the whole preface of the book of Job was that Satan was telling God, “If I do terrible things to that guy, he’ll curse you to your face!”  This scripture is saying that Job never did that, he never proved the devil right.  He never cursed God, even when he believed God was the source of his calamity (when in reality, He wasn’t).

I've also heard it taught that there is no place that it evidences that Job even knew the devil existed.  So, in his mind, these things could have only come from God (which wasn't true, but it was all he knew!)

Want more proof?  Ok.  How about this?  God only has plans to bless us, right?  (Jeremiah 29:11, another striking example of God speaking on His own behalf about His will to do good things for us). 

11 For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

Ok, so even if Job was WRONG in his statement about the Lord, would that be a sin, or just a mistake?  Just a MISCONCEPTION?  Because again, whose word is more weighty, God’s word about himself, or a man’s word about God?

So in the end of the book of Job, Job makes this statement after talking with God and his somewhat midguided friends, right after God speaks in correction to set things straight.  Job says;

            “You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’
    Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
    things too wonderful for me to know.”

So Job repents.  Dude, Sam, I hear Christianese people saying ‘repent’ all the time.  Yeah, but do you know what it means?  It means to change your thinking, to turn around and go the other way.  To “get back to the top” (re=go back, pent (as in penthouse)=top). 

But somehow, in this haze of school shootings and all that, we’ve still had a lot of misrepresentation of God and His will.  Here’s some scriptures that refute a lot of what we hear.

1 Peter 2:24

He personally bore our sins in His [own] body on the tree [as on an altar and offered Himself on it], that we might die (cease to exist) to sin and live to righteousness. By His wounds you have been healed.

1 John 4:18

There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

Ephesians 1;7

7 In Him we have redemption (deliverance and salvation) through His blood, the remission (forgiveness) of our offenses (shortcomings and trespasses), in accordance with the riches and the generosity of His gracious favor,

            So, from all scriptural accounts, God has no interest in punishing us, that’s why Jesus came, so that we wouldn’t even get the punishment we deserved.  And part of Jesus’ sacrifice was making healing available, separating sickness and tragedy as works of the devil, not God.

So why all the scriptures?  We ain’t in a church building, Sam.  That may be true, but aren’t you tired of Christians giving you religious stuff without backing it up with the actual Bible?

And these days, we have so much more and better things than Job did.  We now have the sacrifice of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.  We don’t have to give 8 billion different sacrifices anymore because it’s been taken care of, we just have to receive the sacrifice that’s been made for us.

I’ll top this off by saying this:  lots of really nice, but religious people still believe this “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh” thing.  They’re still great, committed people, and I’m not saying they don’t have a relationship with God.  But I’ll say this; people that I know of who have REAL results in their lives and show a lot of EVIDENCE that they have a relationship with God/are led by the Holy Spirit in a real and practical way, and not some weird spooky way, also believe that this was Job talking in his limited understanding and not some doctrine-building cornerstone.  These are people that spend a lot of time allowing themselves to be corrected and led by God in their personal lives, and Job 1:21-22 doesn’t give them grievance.

So at the end of the day, you can believe what you want, but I have found more than enough proof to say that we’re propitiating a lie when we tell people God took their unborn child, or killed their loved one.  Because, again,

John 10:10

“10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” 

So, in the next blog, we’re gonna pair this up with it’s sister statement, “Oh, The Lord did that terrible thing to teach us a lesson.”  Yeah.  We’ve got to talk about that next.

    I've gone through a time where I'm trying to figure out how to market myself.  For quite a while, I was convinced that I didn't want to market myself as a Christian artist.  Why?  Well, because there are so many preconceptions that come with that, for everyone.  I personally have felt that things like Christian fiction (in film and other mediums) has been, for the most part, cliche and predictable.  Christian media in general, shy of some exceptions, has had an overall B or C grade stamped on it's forehead for a really long time, and in a lot cases, rightfully so.   
    I once heard somebody say, "Man, (a particular belief system) is crazy, but it sure turns out some really successful people/entertainers."  I'd like that to be able to be said about Christians more.  I heard a story about a Christian actor who went out into the world, staying on the foundation of his faith, and was getting great opportunities in the real world, on things like CSI and eventually in some big hollywood movies (a Will Smith movie from what I heard).  That's what I like to see, out there actually affecting the culture.  Even farther.  Bigger. So I've realized that, whether "Christian" goes on the genre label for me or not (and either way, I'm not offended) , it's really more about what I say with my life and music than how I'm marketed.  Because, I do love the world of Christian music and it's people, but I want to get out there and make a change in the world too, and not live in fear of it.  And I have bigger goals that most Christian artists that I've seen anyway.  To me, it's like if someone put "Christian Realtor" on their business card.  Is that really necessary? Or is it better to just be an awesome, titanic realtor who is open about the truth of Jesus and how He's the reason for their success in the world?  That seems much more practical to me.  For me, if could go to an FYE and find my music under the Christian music section, but also in the rock and pop bins, that'd be great.  At a Family Christian store just as likely as a Hot Topic.  That's what I'm talking about, because I think that's how you impact the world.

So, moving on with the idea of misconceptions.  There are a lot of ideas that have been propitiated by religious figures and others that really just need to be addressed.  Because whether you're a Christian or not, there are a lot of people walking around with ideas they got from somewhere that I find to just be the sources of a lot of problems for everyone, especially as a college student, media figure, etc.  In a series of blogs, I want to address these, and shed some light on them.  So, here is a list (but not an exhaustive one) of Christian misconceptions.    Because someone needs to say something.

-Christians aren't supposed to be rich
-"The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away"
-God hates some people
-You need to clean yourself up before you can get right with God
-Being humble means being a wimp
-Christianity and Science are opposed, or can't coexist, or whatever
-God uses things like sickness and tragedy to teach us a lesson

Facebook blows up about this stuff all the time, and it's time someone talked about it.  So, do I have your attention?

I sit here at the University of Dayton's Boll Theater, with a little bit of time on my hands between working on my philosophy of music paper and memorizing monologues for my acting class before I run sound for this jazz band concert.  Yeah.  It's like that.

There are some interesting things coming up soon.  On January 26th, an "early release mix" of my song The Roses will be released along with a live recording of "The Eyes" on and ArtStreet sampler album.  I'll most likely be playing an acoustic set that evening alongside the other artists on the release.

After I power my way through the rest of this academic week and my exams, my focus is going to be recording an EP.  Now, it's really interesting, because I never thought I'd do an EP.  I always found the idea terribly colloquial (did I blog this already) and kinda weak, but now I'm realizing it's a decent way to shake things up around here.

Also, early next year J. Crum and I will be releasing "Exhale".  This thing has been a bear in terms of the sheer creativity that has gone into it.  You're gonna love it.  No, really.  I've seriously nearly kicked myself for writing some of my best music for someone else's project, but best is a relative term.  I should really just say "some of my best so far".  I really look at this as a huge joint acheivement, and I know I say this a lot, but there really is just about something for everyone on this baby.  And no, I don't regret writing this music for Josh's project, I just mean that sometimes I've gotten done with something and gone "Wow.  I should write like this for me too!"

So back to the EP.  I'm trying to balance out showcasing some arranging of things like strings and piano, with doses of heavy and electronic music, and some radio-friendly pop/mellower stuff.  Mellow strictly referring to the music.  You know I keep it real in the lyrical department.  And if you don't, you will.

It's been a warm few days.  I ran to the gym last night in shorts.  I was in an ArtStreet apartment earlier, practically watching it thunderstorm on a warm day in December.  I had told myself that I was going to try not to do too much, but between sending StreetSounds emails, trying to figure out when you can rehearse with your band, and the beckoning of Finals Week.....well, you know.  But, it's not bad when you're sitting around with guys you can crack chord function jokes with while someone else rages about their theory project.  Oh, well.  Music major thing.  ;)

Well, gotta go.  People are filtering in, and I'm the guy sitting behind the 24 channel Soundcraft.  Seeya!  >:)

I've been thinking a lot about purpose and talent lately.

Have you ever been around someone who is talking about an artist whose work they really enjoy (be it film, musical, visual, whatever), and they seem just really devoted to that person?  I mean, I think we all have done this.  Saying things like, "I LOVE them!".  Or maybe it's because they find them attractive?

I've been thinking lately, are we filtering ourselves correctly?  I mean, you don't really know that person aside from some of their work. So, bearing that in mind, is their work reflecting the type of person you'd want to devote yourself to in the first place?  I mean, let me tell you, it's easy to look good onstage.  Some call it gimmicks, some call it good marketing.  If you're really smart, you can understand it both ways.  I ask myself sometimes, is that person someone you'd really want to have as a close relationship?  Would they be there for you if you needed help, would advice they gave you really be mature and truthful, or would they be a source of problems and drama?  Sometimes that's not a question you can answer, because, again, you don't really know them. 

But how many times do we say, "Oh yeah, they're a super nice bunch, I talked to them for a half hour after a show once!"  You know, I really do think we can sometimes get a good look at how nice someone can be sometimes.  But come on.  How many times have you known someone for a year before you even "really" knew them, despite hundreds of conversations?

As artists, even though some of us want to be deep, we realize that we also need to understand and use the shallow too.  And I don't mean that insultingly.  On the overall, we need to look good, act personable, etc.  Sometimes we need to catch people with the superficial (if we're good businesspeople) to then get them further into our art. A lot of people push boundaries in the sexual realm too to gain more fanboys and girls. We ought not do that.  But at the same time, if someone listens to my music because they thought I looked good in a promotional photo, who am I to complain?  I just need to realize that there is a responsibility there, and I need to try to make sure that I am the type of person I'd be ok with my friends and family following.   On and off the stage.

But I challenge you, really listen to the lyrics.  And put them through this test: how would I feel about these lyrics if my best friend wrote them?  How would I suddenly feel about my best friend?  Yeah, you think a certain song is fine until you realize that if your best girl-friend or guy-friend wrote it you'd suddenly feel less comfortable around them.  Maybe they'd feel less chivalrous?  More predatory?  Then beyond that, really look at the lifestyle if you can.  Nobody's perfect in themselves, true, and we ought to show love to everyone, but we ought not turn off our common sense for another human being just based on a shallow knowledge, despite the intimate feeling we may get from their artform. 

I guess what I'm saying is, we all "love" or really enjoy great musicians and actors and artists because they can move us on an essentially deep level (if you don't believe that, just go take a philosophy of music class sometime, or study aesthetics or something).  And as a musician, artist, actor, I want your enthusiastic support.  I want to walk out amongst smoke, lights, fire, and the roar of 100,000 voices to share something really awesome.  But really, too often the people going wild for the musician onstage are practically taking for granted the people that have REALLY done things for them in life.  Are you swooning over the heartthrob and overlooking someone who actually would "catch a grenade for ya", or perhaps someone who (figuratively) already has?