Response to Tiffany Orr - On Calvinism and Holy Hip Hop

Today, I plugged the keywords "Calvinism" and "Holy Hip Hop" into Google's search engine. To my surprise, in the very first hit I read my name. Who could be writing about me? Tiffany Orr is the answer. Tiffany Orr, who I know nothing about, took it upon herself to critique my Facebook notes on Calvinism and Holy Hip Hop.

Click HERE to read her piece

And here is my response:

Orr,

I stumbled across your critique of my Facebook notes about Calvinism and Holy Hip Hop and let's just say, I'm not impressed.

First, it's important when critiquing someone's writing to *ACTUALLY* read what they've written. Since you have set yourself up as an "examiner," I expected to read a half-way thorough examination. What I read instead was a poorly thought-out and executed internet flame with more mistakes and staw man arguments than I would expect to find in a fifth-grade book report.

Your title, for example, with a question mark following "Ministers of the Gospel" implies someone has made the assertion that Calvinist HHH artists are not ministers of the gospel. Who made such an argument? Did you read a different set of Facebook notes about Calvinism and Holy Hip Hop written by a different T. C. Moore? Because no such argument was ever made. In fact, the *EXACT OPPOSITE* statement was made emphatically!

"Artists like The Ambassador are incredibly gifted by God and I am confident they are having a powerful impact on people through their music and ministries. I do not want anything I am about to write to be misconstrued as an attack on these men and women of God. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Deuce and any of the other artists I will reference in this note or part II."

Did you miss that part? Or did you even read the notes at all? Obviously, if you did in fact read the notes, your comprehension skills need improvement.

Not to mention, you never actually argue that Calvinist HHH artists are in fact ministers of the Gospel. So, I am forced to conclude it is still a open question in your mind.

Second, you say, "Moore said he began to be alarmed by all the Calvinist theology Holy Hip Hoppers were espousing. And gee, even some Holy Hip Hop artists, such as the Ambassador, even have degrees in theology."

Did you read an argument against getting theology degrees in these notes? Can you imagine a reason why a seminary student like myself would be arguing *AGAINST* ministers getting theology degrees? Your lack of coherence here is astounding.

Third, you say, "... those who preach Calvinism are preaching the theology of the oppressed."

I'm not even sure how you got this point so very wrong. I'm genuinely stumped. The note does not say Calvinists are preaching the theology of the oppressed. The note says Calvinism is *NOT* the theology of the oppressed. That is why the heading of that section is: "Calvinism is Not the Theology of the Oppressed." And the point of the section is that Calvinism supports oppression, reinforcing systems of oppression. Again, actually reading the piece you are attempting to critique would prevent most of these amateur errors.

(Another tidbit of advice for a budding "examiner" ...examine the headings of a piece carefully, they are usually important.)

Fourth: "I don’t know why Moore wants to beat down Holy Hip Hop artists for expanding on the scriptures in an informed way."

The word you were looking for is "expounding." Biblical scholars "expound" on the Scriptures, they don't "expand" them. Unless of course you meant to imply that they are adding to the word their own biased opinions. In which case, they should indeed be rebuked. In the future, if, as it appears, you have no concept of what goes into biblical exegesis, it would be more wise to say nothing.

"...the Bible clearly illustrates the idea of Election. Ephesians 1 is just one of the chapters in the Bible that deals with the issue."

Yes, Eph. 1 discusses election, and it is so clear that theologians have only been debating this doctrine for hundreds of years. I'm sure they are all so grateful that you've finally put the entire misunderstanding to rest. Where was *YOUR* theology degree from again?

And finally, the kicker...

"What is so wrong with God electing people to pain, misery, exploitation, and despair?"

Hmmmm, let's see. How about, for starters, God is not evil. Remember that whole thing about the God of the Bible being pure, holy, and righteous? ...thats it.

You might be confusing the God of the Bible with another biblical figure called Satan. You cited Jesus' healing ministry as evidence of God's election of people to pain. Are you sure? Peter disagrees with you. He proclaimed Jesus "healed all that were oppressed of the devil," not God. (Acts 10.38)

"I think Moore has a problem with God’s justice."

Orr, what do you know about God's justice? You claim God want's people to be in poverty. Perhaps you have never experienced true poverty and that is why it is a matter you can treat so callously while ignoring the biblical truth about justice. What follows is a mere sampling of the dozens of passages that teach oppression of the poor is injustice that God abhors!

"I know that the LORD secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause of the needy." - Ps. 140.12

"The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern." - Prov. 29.7

"If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them both are others higher still." - Ecc. 5.8

"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless." - Is. 10.1-2

"This is what the LORD says: "For three sins of Israel, even for four, I will not turn back. They sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of sandals. They trample on the heads of the poor as upon the dust of the ground and deny justice to the oppressed. Father and son use the same girl and so profane my holy name." - Amos 2.6-7

"For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins. You oppress the righteous and take bribes and you deprive the poor of justice in the courts." - Amos 5.12

Orr, I am deeply saddened that you have so blindly accepted Calvinism and defend it so very ignorantly. I strongly recommend that in the future, you not weigh in on matters of which you clearly demonstrate you have no grasp.

~T. C.

Freestyle: Hip Hop, Improvisation, and the Praiseworthy Wisdom of God

I'm going to interrupt my own series on mentoring as spiritual warfare to briefly write about something that captured my mind today.

I spent longer than normal on the bus today because I needed to get a haircut in Allston, which is out of the way of my usual trek from Cambridge to Roxbury. This detour gave me time to listen to music and think. I listened to staples like Pac, 100 Portraits, and Jason Morant. But the extended trip gave me the opportunity to indulge in some favorites by Jill Scott and the Roots crew. While Jill and the Roots make music in two separate genres---R & B and hip hop respectively---the two share in common that jazzy Philly sound. This got me thinking about about the many connections hip hop and jazz share. From there, my mind shifted to theology---as it often does.

God and Improvisation

In Openness circles, the analogy of dynamic providence to improvisational jazz is well-known and affirmed. For Open theists, God's relationship to humanity, particularly regarding his salvific economy, is more analogous to the improvisation of jazz musicians than the direct rendering of notes from a musical composition. The brilliance and the artistry of the music is found in it's creativity and spontaneity, not it's ability to follow a pre-programmed routine.

So wide-spread is this analogy, a quick search using the terms "God" and "improvisation" yielded a book called _Theology, Music, and Time_ by Jeremy Begbie. In this book I read this wonderful excerpt:

"...any student of [Romans chapters 9-11] knows that there has been a tendency (especially drawing on chapter 9) to interpret Paul as assuming a predestining divine decree, individual and particular, proceeding from an essentially singular God. It is as if Paul's primary concern were the means by which a (non-trinitarian) God executes a decision which he has made from all eternity with regard to the future of human beings considered as isolated agents -- some for salvation, some for eternal death. Salvation is thus conceived a priori in atomistic and monadic terms, with regard to both human beings and God himself. The musical equivalent would be a composer composing a piece of music, choosing from a list of performers a restricted number of recipients (simultaneously rejecting the rest), and then sending the music out to the chosen for for them to play. We have seen, using musical improvisation in an attempt to allow the text to speak clearly, that Paul's interests are rather different. For he writes of an election to salvation mediated through a process of receiving from, and passing on to others. The orientation of Romans as a whole (including Romans 9) is not towards solitary recipients of a decree but towards communities who already know the interrelatedness basic to salvation and the mission of God's people. Salvation comes, and can only come, within this mutual relatedness. The individual is of course crucially significant, but only within this mutuality. To put it differently, God gives abundantly in order to promote more giving, to generate an overflowing reciprocity, and salvation occurs within this ecology of giving. Moreover--here we move beyond what Paul says explicitly in these chapters--this is a reciprocity which reflects and shares in the eternal relatedness-in-love of the Trinity. This is the momentum which the group improviser learns: to receive music from others, improvise upon it, pass it back and on to others, and all this in such a way that others are drawn in, and they in turn become the new improvisors. The Composer, we might say, comes to be known only in and through the process of passing the music on, and we find that the original music was composed in mutuality, through an infinitely abundant exchange (between Father and Son) in to which we are now being caught up."

- Theology, Music, and Time, Jeremy Begbie p. 262-263

Hip Hop and Freestyling

In hip hop, as in jazz, mastery of the art is not recognized in artists who merely possess the ability to recite or perform pre-written words. Rather, master emcees are praised for their ability to creatively generate skillful rhymes and flows on-the-fly. This talent is called freestyling. In fact, freestyling, like improvisation in jazz and also in hip hop dance, is often performed in a group called a cypher. As Begbie's points out, improvisation has a drawing effect on it's listeners. It is an invitation to participation.

The Praiseworthy Wisdom of God

All this leads me to the conclusion at which I arrived today while riding the bus. The wisdom of God is praiseworthy precisely because God masterfully improvises with his creation the music of life. Just as the lyrical prowess of the emcee is praiseworthy due to his or her artistic creativity, so it is with God. In the Trinity, for all eternity, the divine community has shared in the cypher of mutual loving exchange. In the Gospel, and in the life, ministry, self-sacrifice, and resurrection of Christ, God invites us to join in. When we identify with the Improvisor and begin to receive his music, giving back our own mimicked notes, we share in the triune God's eternal song of love and become improvisors ourselves.

The wisdom of God is praiseworthy precisely because it is truly wise. Wisdom is not required to coerce inferior beings to live out pre-programmed lives towards a pre-programmed fate. Just as in jazz and hip hop, superior praise is due the artist resourceful and creative enough to adapt words perfectly for a particular moment in time.

Join the cypher!