Why Emery rules the world

I got the chance to go see Emery perform on Tuesday at the Marquee theater. They played with Anberlin, Jonzetta, Far-Less, and The Classic Crime. It was an awesome show.

The Classic Crime opened up, they weren't terrible. I really liked their sound but you could tell that they were a new band. They didn't really interact with the crowd and weren't very energetic. Their bassist was pretty into it, but their guitar players just kinda stood there. That may have been because everyone in the band sang at one point or another. They had some really cool harmoies and stuff. I liked them, but they weren't that great.

Far-Less followed up with an absolutly terrible performance. I had heard them before from their CD and I liked their CD. But they were terrible live, their singer was high or something. He kept like contorting his body and rubbing his face and making like finger shadows on the wall. Plus he just stood there with the mic in the stand. In the time I was watching them I don't think he left center stage the whole time. To top it off, their bassist was this old guy who played the bass way up under his armpit. They absolutely sucked. I left and went outside while they were playing. Couldn't stand to watch them.

Jonzetta took the stage next, and while you could tell they were new at performing, they put on a great show. Their music was a little odd, lots of off beat syncopation, but they did a good job.

Next came Anberlin. I've seen Anberlin before in concert and they have definetly improved. The first time I saw them was right after the release of their first album, Blueprints for the Black Market. It was their first tour ever and it showed. They managed to put on a great show then and really did a great job this time. Very energetic, their singer hit every single note of his incredibly high range just like a pro. You could definetly tell that they have been practicing alot. And their guitar player just nailed his few solos. Just like the album. The only thing I didn't like about Anberlin was that they have picked up a new back up guitar player who doubles as a screamo singer. Anberlin has a great emo-punk sound, I don't understand why they think they need to be screaming too. But they were great.

Next entered the band we were all waiting to see, Emery. This band from SC has literally blown up the emo-core scene. They went from virtual obsurity to near stardom in only a year. Their first album, released in 2004, shot them into the "emo" scene as the leaders of the pack. Now that "emo" is cool, they have only become more popular. Its barely 2006 and they are headlining a major tour across the US. And not without reason. Emery has one of the best live performances I have ever seen. They are so energetic, they are mega talented, they interact with the crowd really well, and they nail every song perfectly. Sounds just like the album. Toby(Lead Vocals) and Devin(BGVs and guitar) nailed all of the harmonies. They finally got smart and let their keyboardist, who doesn't normally sing, handle most of the screaming for them. He was good at it, but I think Toby and Devin are much better. Another thing that Emery is famous for is their keyboardist(Josh). He is absolutely nuts, runs all of the stage, picks up his keyboard and swings it around and is just energetic in general. Adding him as the screamer for live shows only makes him more influential and helps him perform better. One thing that they did that I really enjoyed was switch places in the band. On their second album "The Question" Devin does a lot more singing on some of the songs. On the songs where Devin is the main singer, Toby put on a guitar and played while Devin took the job of lead vocals. They were absolutely excellent. Played all my favorites plus some songs that I didn't expect them to play. Emery is the best emo-core band out there. No one else even touches them. This was the third time that I have seen Emery and they only get better.

I encourage everyone who is a fan of hard music or emo in general to pick up both their albums. The Weak's End was the first album and "The Question" their second. The latter of the two is a little more "people friendly" being that it "catchy." The first album is qutie slow moving but musically amazing. I can't say that I have a favorite Emery album but they are both on infinite repeat on my Zen right now.

I am recruiting for the military

The military of God, Jr. High division.


HE WANTS YOU...to Join Jr. High Staff at EVBC.

Ok, so its shameless, but I don't care. We could really use more Jr. High staff at EVBC. Especially Godly guys that want to serve. Summer camp promos are in full swing so we expect that small groups will be growing again. And this year we are going to Sea World as part of summer camp, so we need more people just for crowd control issues.

So anyways, I am manifesting myself as the voice of God and telling you to JOIN UP NOW!!!!

DISCLAIMER:The writer of this blog claims no actual power of God other than that which is given to every believer at the moment of salvation. The writer does also not claim to know the particular will of God in this or any instance, except in the instances of WoW, in which the will of God is for the Horde to die. Repeatedly.
The writer of this blog does claim ultimate coolness and tags you with blog tag. You're it, no tagbacks.

My blog has changed over the years

Wow,

I was just reading some old posts that I had. They were fricking histerical. Somewhat pointless sometimes, but histerical.

Go read some of them. Like, Soy Milk is Killing the Youth of America. Or the one about awesome teams that I am a part of.


Myabe I will start writing some more, longer blogs, discussing more things. Maybe. No, probably.

Or maybe I'm just not as interesting as I used to be.

Nah, that's not possible.

Is it necessary?

       I have been having some conversations recently with people. Some conversations about church. What is church? How should it work? What is a “worship service?” Is the American tradition of singing songs in church appropriate? If so, what kind of songs? Hymns? Praise Choruses? Rock ballads? All these questions and more.

       As someone who is actively involved in my church, East Valley Bible Church or EVBC for short, I want to constantly be evaluating where my church is and involve myself in accordance. The topic of Sunday46, our two evening services, has been something I have been thinking about with some fervor. For those of you not intimately familiar with what Sunday46 is, they are “modern” style services at our church. At these services, the music is loud, the songs have rhythm, and sometimes, people have been caught dancing. Not a “Hey, look-at-me dance,” but a, “I’m-excited-to-be-here-slightly jumping-in-place-dance.” The room is full of energy, which one could say is fostered by the environment. The question that I have always asked of this is, why? Why do we have a “modern” worship service? Why do we have more than one style at all? And perhaps most importantly, why do we need to call it something? Why does it have to have a name? Why can’t it just be the 6 o’clock service at EVBC? Why do we feel the need to differentiate it from the rest? Why don’t we have Sunday 8:301146? (Those are the other service times.)

       Here is some background for where “Sunday 46” came from.

       We used to have a Wednesday night youth event called Fuel. Before that, it was Rock.com. Rock.com was an attempt at having a stereotypical “outreach” night for the student ministries. It was a time where you were encouraged to bring your friends while our teaching team, through the exposition of scripture, talked about what the Bible had to say on issues like relevant to a Jr./Sr. High school student. Fuel changed gears a little. We took the focus off outreach and placed it on believers. Fuel was a no-holds-barred rocking “youth service.” It wasn’t intended for non-believers, although if they came they would hear the gospel over and over. Fuel was a time of “modern” worship songs and then solid teaching from the book of Acts. The teaching team, specifically Tim Maughn, went through the book of Acts slowly and with an excellent exegesis.
All during this time, the elder board was meeting. They came to Fuel, they saw some of the passion with which students expressed their worship of God. Not only through song, but through the careful study of his word. The elder board began thinking, “what if we had adults here?” “What if some of the parents of these children saw their passion for God?” “What if…?” Thus was born what is now called Sunday46. Fuel as it was, eradicated and replaced with more small group time for student ministries (a decision I thought was long past due). Sunday46 is a couple services at EVBC that have a certain style. This “style” is conducive to a “free” environment. What I mean by that is their intention is to create a place where parents, children, young and old, can and will all worship together. Not only worship together through song, but the study of his word and through the solid expository teaching of it.

       The question that this raises is an interesting one. Why? Weren’t the services before sufficient? Or is music that big of a deal? What is the purpose of church? Is it for enjoyment or the exhorting of God’s name? Should you have different styles of a service? The elder board wanted to try it out, and Sunday46 has become a very popular service each week(We have on some nights, in excess of 800 people there. With only 652 chairs.). These discourses are things I have done before with people, but I need to have them again.

      I do know one thing, when solid churches take even the smallest of cues from the ECM. One has to ask the questions.

The most useless statistic ever

Its been awhile since I updated. Huh. We will have to fix that.

I was at church on Sunday, as I usually am, and I was particularly struck by our pastor's sermon. Being that we did not have Jr. High this week, I have the priveledge of hearing it twice, so it was double good.

Tom has been going through a series on James recently. This weeks question, was are you living a life of obedience. Tom shared one stat that he read from a study. This study was part coupled with an article saying that it was the most disturbing statistic you will ever hear. This study said that over 90% of the people in America attend church and that the average church goer acts no different from a non-church goer. (gasp....) Tom, being the realist that he is, quickly dissected this information for us. He said, "So what, just because you go to church doesn't mean you're a christian." He then shared some more stats that he has read before. While an overwhelming majority of Americans say they are christians, once you add in some basic christian fundamentals (The deity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, etc.) that the number drops to below 10%. (7% if I remember correctly.) Only 7%, wow. Tom followed that up with, "So who cares if church people act like non-church people. If they aren't believers then how can we expect them to act any differently. Because its the change that Christ makes that causes our lives to be different, not going to church. So Tom called this stat (over 90% of people go to church) the most usless stat ever.

While that was interesting, it wasn't the focus of Tom's message. His message was basically on being a doer of the word. He equated the obedient life with being a doer of the word. He said one way to tell if you were a doer of the word was to ask yourself the question, Does my life look different? James 1:22-25 says,

But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

Tom described the mirrors that they had in this time period. The wouldn't be polished glass like ours today, but rather polished bronze or brass. So they couldn't get the clearest image of themselves, but well enough to see. The passage also describes the man looking intently at the image. So it's not just a cursory glance. He was taking the time to analyze what he looked like. The main thing that I take away from this passage is an application point. I would say that James is describing a person who is wasting their time with looking in the mirror. Because they forget right after they look away. So what was the point of looking in a mirror? I would say that this applies to our lives in context of scripture. What point is there to reading it or studying it if we don't apply it to our lives? Is there one? Does mindless reading of scripture produce fruit in a person?

In a believer's life, if they are truly reading, the scripture will affect their life. But if I'm a pagan, then its just another book to me.

Live your life doing the word, because life without it is pointless.

I'm addicted to talk radio again...

Hey all,

I decided to start listening to talk radio again in the mornings. I also listen all day at work when I can. Its an addiction and I'm seeing a counsler about it.

Today and the Laura Ingraham show, she was talking about the war in Iraq(as many of them are). She mentioned this article, I read it and loved it. The points made about our progress in the war are excellent!

"At War With Ourselves We're winning in Iraq. Let's not lose at home. BY VICTOR DAVIS HANSON Wednesday, March 1, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

Last week the golden dome of the Askariya shrine in Samarra was blown apart. Sectarian riots followed, and reprisals and deaths ensued. Thugs and criminals came out of the woodwork to foment further violence. But instead of the apocalypse of an ensuing civil war, a curfew was enforced. Iraqi security forces stepped in with some success. Shaken Sunni and Shiite leaders appeared on television to urge restraint, and there appeared at least the semblance of reconciliation that may soon presage a viable coalition government.

But here at home you would have thought that our own capitol dome had exploded. Indeed, Americans more than the Iraqis needed such advice for calm to quiet our own frenzy. Almost before the golden shards of the mosque hit the pavement, pundits wrote off the war as lost--as we heard the tired metaphors of "final straw" and "camel's back" mindlessly repeated. The long-anticipated civil strife among Shiites and Sunnis, we were assured, was not merely imminent, but already well upon us. Then the great civil war sort of fizzled out; our own frenzy subsided; and now exhausted we await next week's new prescription of doom--apparently the hyped-up story of Arabs at our ports. That the Iraqi security forces are becoming bigger and better, that we have witnessed three successful elections, and that hundreds of brave American soldiers have died to get us to the brink of seeing an Iraqi government emerge was forgotten in a 24-hour news cycle.

Few observers suggested that the Samarra bombing of a holy mosque by radical Muslims might be a sign of the terrorists' desperation--killers who have not, and cannot, defeat the U.S. military. After the furor over Danish cartoons, French rioting and Iranian nuclear perfidy, the entire world is turning on radical Islam and the terrorists feel keenly this rising tide of opposition on the frontline in Iraq.

True, the Sunni Triangle, unlike southern Iraq and Kurdistan, is often inhospitable to the forces of reconstruction--but hardly lost to jihadists and militias as we are told. There is a disturbing sameness to our acrimony at home, as we recall all the links in this chain of America hysteria from the brouhaha over George Bush's flight suit to purported flushed Korans at Guantanamo Bay. Each time we are lectured that the looting, Abu Ghraib, the embalming of Uday and Qusay, the demeaning oral exam of Saddam, unarmored Humvees, inadequate body armor or the latest catastrophe has squandered our victory, the unimpressed U.S. military simply goes about what it does best--defeating the terrorists and training the Iraqi military to serve a democratic government. They stay focused in this long war, while our pundits prepare the next controversy.

The second-guessing of 2003 still daily obsesses us: We should have had better intelligence; we could have kept the Iraqi military intact; we would have been better off deploying more troops. Had our forefathers embraced such a suicidal and reactionary wartime mentality, Americans would have still torn each other apart over Valley Forge years later on the eve of Yorktown--or refought Pearl Harbor even as they steamed out to Okinawa.

There is a more disturbing element to these self-serving, always evolving pronouncements of the "my perfect war, but your disastrous peace" syndrome. Conservatives who insisted that we needed more initial troops are often the same ones who now decry that too much money has been spent in Iraq. Liberals who chant "no blood for oil" lament that we unnecessarily ratcheted up the global price of petroleum. Progressives who charge that we are imperialists also indict us for being naively idealistic in thinking democracy could take root in post-Baathist Iraq and providing aid of a magnitude not seen since the Marshall Plan. For many, Iraq is no longer a war whose prognosis is to be judged empirically. It has instead transmogrified into a powerful symbol that apparently must serve deeply held, but preconceived, beliefs--the deceptions of Mr. Bush, the folly of a neoconservative cabal, the necessary comeuppance of the American imperium, or the greed of an oil-hungry U.S.

If many are determined to see the Iraqi war as lost without a plan, it hardly seems so to 130,000 U.S. soldiers still over there. They explain to visitors that they have always had a design: defeat the Islamic terrorists; train a competent Iraqi military; and provide requisite time for a democratic Iraqi government to garner public support away from the Islamists.

We point fingers at each other; soldiers under fire point to their achievements: Largely because they fight jihadists over there, there has not been another 9/11 here. Because Saddam is gone, reform is not just confined to Iraq, but taking hold in Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf. We hear the military is nearly ruined after conducting two wars and staying on to birth two democracies; its soldiers feel that they are more experienced and lethal, and on the verge of pulling off the nearly impossible: offering a people terrorized from nightmarish oppression something other than the false choice of dictatorship or theocracy--and making the U.S. safer for the effort.

The secretary of defense, like officers in Iraq, did not welcome the war, but felt that it needed to be fought and will be won. Soldiers and civilian planners express confidence in eventual success, but with awareness of often having only difficult and more difficult choices after Sept. 11. Put too many troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we earn the wages of imperialism, or create a costly footprint that is hard to erase, or engender a dependency among the very ones in whom we wish to ensure self-reliance. Yet deploy too few troops, and instability arises in Kabul and Baghdad, as the Islamists lose their fear of American power and turn on the vulnerable we seek to protect.

In sum, after talking to our soldiers in Iraq and our planners in Washington, what seems to me most inexplicable is the war over the war--not the purported absence of a plan, but that the more we are winning in the field, the more we are losing it at home.

Mr. Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and the author most recently of "A War Like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War" (Random House, 2005). " - Taken from the Wall Street Journal Online http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008030"

We are making headway in Iraq, dispite what anti-american Senators say. The Iraqi forces are standing up to more and more and will soon be able to police their country without the aide of U.S. forces. Our plan in Iraq has always been clear, just because the general populace wasn't always 100% in on military plans doesn't mean they weren't there. We knew that there was a purpose and details have come when it has been safe to tell us.

I for one am confident in America's ability to finish what we started. We aren't losing.