Talk:Jesus Culture

Band

Yikes! I didn't want this to re-direct to Jesus Culture Band. Anyone know how to fix this?RichLindvall (talk) 18:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That was my fault; sorry! I see you've figured it out. Best — e. ripley\^talk 19:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Article tone/style

Please refer to inline cleanup tags. Revise wording and phrasing to that which is not specific to the Christian community, i.e., "Christianese". Much of the terminology used in this article is not understood by all readers of Wikipedia. Thank you. Cindamuse (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cindamuse, I agree with you that a lot of this article's content is "Christianese", but some stuff is just the way it is, and cannot be said better. For example that you marked "speak" as jargon just shows that you don't believe that God can actually speak to people. As you see even considering some words as jargon is not neutral, but a matter of belief.

Btw. if a Non-Physicist or Non-Scientist should ever read the article electroweak interaction he will definitely not understand everything. The same applies to texts about Christian topics. --Gomeck1 (talk) 22:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• All articles stand on their own merits. The style, tone, and jargon in this article needs to be cleaned up. Wikipedia is not the place to promote or preach. Language used needs to be that which is commonly understood, rather than specific to a certain group of people. God may speak to individuals, but this concept may be foreign on a worldwide basis. If the article presents jargon of this nature, a detailed explanation needs to be provided for clarification. Please note that my religious background is not an appropriate issue in this forum. In my role on Wikipedia, I'm more than able to separate my personal beliefs from my assessment of an article's tone and style. All in all though, I'm washed by the blood of the Lamb, and that's just the way it is. However, use of this statement in an article on Wikipedia is inappropriately placed. Cindamuse (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Criticism by Todd Friel, John MacArthur and other ministers at Strange Fire Conference

There were two clips of songs that were picked by Todd Friel by Jesus Culture that were criticized by Todd Friel, Pastor John MacArthur at Pastor John MacArthur's Strange Fire Conference as "Counterfeit Worship." They believe the music is mindless repetition of words opening people up to evil spirits. The Reformed Baptist movement wants to stop all Contemporary Christian music and go back to the old hymns. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReODdPFU_wE There should probably be added a section, "Criticism," to the article.Easeltine (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Easeltine (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not applicable because honestly I stopped reading your point when you said "The Reformed Baptist movement wants to stop all Contemporary Christian music...." Seems like MacArthur has a bone to pick with all Christian music artists and so it isn't a JC issue. If anything were to added to Wiki, I'd put something on MacArthur's page, but that's it. Ckruschke (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke

I believe any commentary by John MacArthur - however valid - is irrelevant to a factual history of this band and movement - create a Criticism or Controversy - and place your comments there. Any historical reality of this band is not dissuaded by MacArthur's point of view, nor does his POV change the chronological reality hriver talk 8:46 October 2014

I think your removal of the material is censorship. I have changed the heading so you can't use it as an excuse for removing the information. The entire article is POV, mostly in favour of the group, and so WP:BALANCE is required. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I disagree - I like MacArthur for the most part - and in this article there are both endorsements and cautions - if you wish to be implicit with your criticism, create another section - macarthur has nothing to do with the group's background - unless there is some history there that is in error. hriver talk 13:46 November 2014 — Preceding undated comment added 20:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criticism specifically says not to create such sections. Instead of complaining, come up with a new section heading instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I removed the text. I thought it was odd when it was added and actually liked when it was removed recently. It made the article shift gears completely and was awkward. I also feel, given the length of the article excluding discography info, that it was odd to have a criticism. And only from 1 person at that. Killiondude (talk) 03:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Walter, one might surmise you have an infatuation with reverting. Killiondude (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's odd. I have a need to discussing things completely.

Find a way to include it so that it doesn't "shift gears". MacArthur's criticism is representative of others', and really more aimed at all charismatics, but he singles-out this group. Because of the press the conference garnered, it should be mentioned, although the press did not repeat his criticism.

And when you get a chance, please read WP:NPA and focus on the content, not the contributors. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Walter. I changed the sentence according to both my concerns listed above. I hope it is to your liking. As for his criticism reflective of others', please provide a source. Wikipedia frowns on original research. I've read the policy page you linked. Thank you for your help. Killiondude (talk) 00:46, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

It's a good improvement. The original went on much longer about the material. I tried to keep some of the information, but as I said, this is an improvement. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Here's a Catholic's point of view. I am part of Couples For Christ a 34 year old, 106 country, Evangelical Family Ministry that always sings at least three songs every time we meet (as a Household Leader, two to four times a week, one or two weekends a month)--two fast contemporary Charismatic Christian praise music songs, and one slow contemporary Charismatic Christian worship song. We may sing more, but always at least that formula of three songs. I personally, have the same problem at our church with a elderly person of influence not wanting our Life Teen Mass to have new contemporary Charismatic Christian music, but to have all old hymns. Sorry, but Pope John Paul II called the "Charismatic Movement" a "blessing to The Church" and had a standing weekly meeting with Cardinal Mascarenhas every Friday morning who was in charge of the Charismatic Movement within the Catholic Church. We, Couples For Christ, a charismatic contemporary song singing lay ministry with Pontifical Right have an office at the Vatican. Couples For Christ Family Ministries have Kids For Christ (4-11 y.o.'s), Youth For Christ (12-21 y.o.'s), Singles For Christ (22-40 y.o.'s), of course Couples For Christ, Handmaids of the Lord (41+ y.o. women attending meetings alone), and Servants of the Lord (41+ y.o. men attending alone). Our Youth For Christ and Singles For Christ Family Ministries are huge organizations with contemporary Charismatic Christian music being a large part of why they are the size they are presently. Old hymn's could do it for them, but contemporary Charismatic Christian music HAS definitely done it for them, and the Pope and the Vatican recognize this. It's the fruit of your labors that determines if it's from the Lord or not. If our older Christian brethren do not want to understand this, then they are too closed minded to reach out to the entire populace and will only reach a very small segment of the population, and maybe only the U.S. population, not globally! Moreover, the Catholic Church has a marriage help ministry called TOOLS = Teams of Our Lady. Current members of Couples For Christ that had unsigned divorce papers went to both 1st timer meetings to try to save their marriage. They have testified that because Couples For Christ had great music and served food while TOOLS did not, they decided to join Couples For Christ instead of TOOLS. Couples For Christ has determined what is needed to attract people to our various Family Ministries and have implemented systems to bring in the most people, in other words Evangelize most effectively! It's been four (4) years and their marriage is so much stronger now and they "love each other so much more than before they knew about Couples For Christ." Charismatic Contemporary Christian Music is a blessing to all Christians, whether Catholics, Protestants, or Greek Orthodox. Lift up your hands in praise and worship to our Lord! If you can't, that's okay, He loves you anyway.

M. Garcia Orange County California — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:3E8F:5B00:410C:6FBD:6A16:1B45 (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Need for Criticism section

Jesus Culture has been criticized by well known and highly influential pastor John MacArthur as being overly repetitive and demonic at the Strange Fire Conference held in Southern California in October 2013. This is a matter of objective fact, irregardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with the criticisms in and of themselves.

Fraudulent and willful intent to deceive by omission or concealment of such well publicized and thoroughly circulated criticism from MacArthur gives rise to a reasonable suspicion that Jesus Culture or Bethel Church employees or some third party brand management firm have been paid to monitor and intentionally conceal via fraudulent omission criticisms that are factual and not a matter of hearsay or legitimate defamation. This reasonable suspicion that such intentionally deceptive practices are being implemented by a "Christian revivalist" music band only serves to bolster the credibility of its critics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpearson19 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you read why the material was reverted? There was no intent to deceive by anyone. I don't even like Jesus Culture which is why I watch this article. I suggest you stop making accusations and personal attacks against me.

The material was reverted because the source is WP:PRIMARY. And besides, there have been many refutations of MacArthur's criticism.

The fact that there was an unnecessary extended quote that bordered on a copyright violation was another problem.

Every article needs balance, but misinformed opinion is not appropriate. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Now that I've had a chance to sleep and breathe I would like to respond with slightly more clarity. There are great dangers in using this primary source. As I alluded to above, it's just MacArthur's opinion that modern worship in the form of the one song that was singled-out is non-Christian. There is nothing to support that opinion. I tried to find someone who analyzed that particular statement. Unfortunately all that I could find were blogs. Some that stand in opposition to MacArthur's opinion and some that support it or simply redistribute the original material. There has been no critical response from what could be considered to be a reliable source. I may have a solution to the problems, but it's not ideal. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:00, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I have tried to offer a balanced response without the rhetoric. My main goal was to point out that MacArthur is opposed to a large branch of Christianity and has previously gone on-record stating that, which was entirely absent in the original. I tried not to minimize MacArthur's importance in Christianity though, but make it clear that his view is not popularly held. I then took a few phrases of the original material and made the current sentence. Feel free to discuss the contents or proposed changes here as an edit war could ensue from both sides of the debate if done in an organized fashion.

Full disclosure: I am not affiliated with Jesus Culture in any way. My main interests on Wikipedia include Christian music and have edited this article to that end in the past and that is why it is on my watch list. I am not a cessationist but I am also not a charismatic although I do attend a church that uses contemporary worship. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:34, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Walter - thanks for your efforts. Your edit appears to me to be pretty even-handed even if I don't agree with MacArthur's point. I'm probably on the opposite side of the spectrum from Jpearson19 as I've played several Jesus Culture songs in the worship teams I've been on and attended several other churches where Jesus Culture music has been performed by their worship teams (and several others where although it wouldn't have fit with their worship style, it wouldn't have been considered "evil") eventhough all these churches were definitely NOT charismatic churches. As far as MacArthur goes, I'm not sure who would consider him mainstream even in the non-denominational world... But as usual, this is just my opinion. Ckruschke (talk) 17:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke

Unethical Online Reputation Management

It appears as though some company is being paid by this rock band to manage their online reputation in an unethical and dishonest way. Numerous people have tried to add a section on the plethora of criticism being made about this rock band, but someone comes in afterwards and erases it. There have been a number of troubling complaints against this band for it's promotion of prosperity theology and high pressure solicitation of donations. Band members have been recorded making grandiose and outlandish promises of financial blessings and medical healing in return for donations or CD purchases. Numerous articles have been published warning parents that minors have been seen at these concerts being told that they can "get drunk in the spirit." Complaints have also been published concerning the abuse of people with disabilities at the concerts, such as having wheelchairs and crutches taken away while other people command healing to occur. However, no one is ever healed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.224.110.153 (talk • contribs) 0:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

It appears as though you know nothing about the subject and you're about to be blocked.

I am not being paid by anyone. I am a volunteer.

Your edits go against the references in the article.

This is not about a rock band, the music ministry is simply one portion of Jesus Culture's outreach. That is supported in the references.

If there have been complaints, provide them supported with reliable sources.

If the band are part of the health and wealth gospel, they wouldn't be the first in contemporary Christianity, but that has to be supported with reliable sources.

Being "drunk in the Spirit" makes sense to everyone in Evangelicalism except cessationists.

Again, related to disabilities, feel free to support the statements with reliable sources.

However, stop removing the referenced information just because you disagree with it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:54, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Criticism Removal

I remopved the uncited criticism of the band. The passage made little sense in terms of sytax adn was talking about the Pastor's critique of another band Hillsong. Jesus Culture is not Hillsong nor are tehy affiliated with Hillsong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.16.14 (talk) 19:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The material is referenced and it's about Jesus Culture, not Hillsong. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

John MacArthur

First of all, I want to say some kind and sympathetic things about John MacArthur. I was in prayer about him yesterday and I had a glorious insight about how much God loves his soul as His child and the wonderful things He has for him in heaven, not for his Christian service over the years per se, but because John is God's child through Christ and is loved by Him. Now, John decided a long time ago to reject an authentic work of God in people's lives, but he did it for some very good reasons. There has been a tremendous amount of ugliness in the Charismatic movement over the years, a lot of which I keep praying and seeing God separate the gold from the dross. But it isn't that easy for everyone. John chose an early path to play it safe, and in order for him to maintain his integrity, he must stick with that path and stick with it closely. As a result, he is forced, out of logical necessity, to attribute supernatural power among the Charismatics as being a work of demonic forces. This is an unfortunate, but understandable consequence of his early decisions, and one that may need to play out for the rest of his life. He will be blessed in the age to come to discover the goodness of God toward those who he mistakenly thought were his enemies. And we will completely forgive him for it, ideally on this side of eternity. In any case, to those who support Jesus Culture, I would encourage everyone to relax, do not fear, and allow the full measure of John's criticisms to be expressed here or anywhere without softening it. People need to hear and understand what John is saying because they need to discover where he is coming from. Full exposure of his viewpoint will only serve God's purposes to distance John from the rest of mainstream Christianity (where necessary) and allow us to flourish and progress to where God is taking us as His beautiful and spotless bride before the return of Christ. So again, I encourage Jesus Culture supporters to allow the full measure of John's criticisms to remain in this article without censoring any of the sharpest parts of his rhetoric. Doing this will promote your cause. They crucified Christ and look what happened. DavidPesta (talk) 14:31, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jesus Culture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100924032200/http://www.redding.com/news/2010/jan/16/bethel-burgeons-under-pastors-visions-of/ to http://www.redding.com/news/2010/jan/16/bethel-burgeons-under-pastors-visions-of/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

MacArthur blurb

There have been numerous editors over the last 300 edits or so to this page who have vied that the MacArthur blurb is unwarranted (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9). I figured now might be a good time to revisit it, to see, in the scope of things, if consensus is for or against keeping MacArthur's say about the band. For the most part, Walter has been the only one reverting the edits consistently. Pinging @Hriver:, @TravMan:, @FiredanceThroughTheNight:, @Sean.hoyland:, @Ckruschke:, @Walter Görlitz:.

There have been some interesting points made, mostly via edit summary. One is that MacArthur seems to be critiquing the genre as a whole, which may prove better held in his article or Contemporary worship music (or if there is a better target article). The other is that MacArthur's specific view may not represent the majority of Evangelical Christians (source for this). Another is that MacArther himself (not necessarily his view on this) may not be as relevant to mainline Christianity. Indeed, a search of his name on Christianity Today, one of the most respected American evangelical publications, has the first 20 results stretching to 2013 [1]. Many results are related to his cessationist idealogy, which is one of the only reasons mentioned in this article, which goes to the point that it might better fit his article or the genre as a whole. To what end do we value this one person's criticism? Just because it specifically mentions Jesus Culture? Killiondude (talk) 06:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

It's absolutely not representative of opinion of Evangelicalism, only one branch: cessationism. For the record, I didn't want it in either, but the original editor convinced me that it was valid here. He is the most prominent living cessatonist, and because the criticism is directed at this group, I felt it might be valid here. It certainly does not reflect all of modern worship music. Musicians such as Chris Tomlin and others are not hyper charismatic. Jesus Culture is the most prominent of the hyper charismatics, which is why it's more valid here than in a general article. I'm not watching the MacArthur article, but I did add it there when it was added here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 14 May 2018 (UTC)