The first assumption it makes is that it is somehow less desirable to “preach to the choir” -- to those who are already Christians. In an ideal world, someone would become a Christian and from then on would live a perfect life, and never need any additional instruction, but this is not the world we live in. As a Christian, I know I have struggles in my life. I know that I constantly need improvement. It isn't merely a case of knowing the facts of Christianity; I need constant reminders to live it. When I pop in a Christian CD, I can see the changes in my attitude, which I hope will lead to changes in my behavior. So perhaps Christian music is preaching to the choir, but the choir needs the preaching too.

    The second assumption that this criticism make is that a Christian artist can easily switch from being a “Christian musician” to just a “musician.” Even if a Christian musician never call himself a “Christian musician,” would he not still be call a “Christian musician” by everyone who encountered his music? Of course this assumes that his music contained explicitly Christian lyrics. One could of course write songs without ever mentioning the words “Jesus,” “God,” or “Bible.” He could still express Christian values his songs, just not let himself get called a “Christian musician.” Then when people talk to him, such as in a interview, he could tell them about his Christian faith. I'm not going to argue whether there are people called to express their Christian faith in this way. The question is whether it is undesirable to accept the label, “Christian music” in your work as a musician. Let's suppose that someone avoided writing songs that mention explicitly Christian things. Is this the best way for him to use his talents? Just because music can be written in particular way, does not me that a particular artist is the best a writing that kind of music. What if a musician is the best at writing very explicit Christian songs? I don't mean that he can't write other songs, but what if the kinds of songs that he feels most inspired to write are ones specifically mentioning Christian things? What if when he tries to write other kinds of songs, they just aren't as good? I think the best way to serve God and the public, is to write the best quality songs he can, using the skills that he has.

    Finally, the critic assumes having more exposure to non-Christians while not being a “Christian musician” be more effective in evangelism then being a “Christian musician” and being exposed to less non-Christians. Before addressing this assumption, it worth remembering that most of the people in the United States identify themselves with Christianity. This means that if a US band attracted people who represented the population at large, most of their listeners would be people who profess Christianity. Non-Christians are still only going to be a minority of their audience anyway. The question is how much impact is the music going to have on these people, when they tried to make their music less obviously Christian anyway. I think it's at least questionable whether their music would really be a more effective evangelism tool.

    In conclusion, whether or not Christian music preaches to the choir is irrelevant, because the choir needs preaching. Second, musicians need to use their talents to their full potential, even if this means writing specifically Christian lyrics. Finally, it's certainly questionable, whether less obviously Christian lyrics will be benefit more people then clearly Christian lyrics.