Bono & The Incarnation

[Pilgrim]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.

The idea that God, if there is a force of Love and Lovig in the universe, that it would seek to esplain itself is amazing enough. That it would seek to explain itself and describe itself by becoming a child born in straw poverty, in [crap] and straw...a child...I just thought: "Wow!" Just the poetry...Unknowable love, unknowable power, describes itself as the most vulnerable. There it was. I was sitting there, and it's not that it hadn't struck me before, but tears came down my face, and I saw the genius of this, utter genius of picking a particular point in time and deciding to turn on this. Because...love needs to find a form, intimacy needs to be whispered. To me, it makes sense. It's actually logical. It's pure logic. Essence has to manifest itself. It's inevitable. Love has to become action or something concrete. It would have to happen. There must be an incarnation. Love must be made flesh.

I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

[Amazing Rando]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

That is stunning. The man has an incredible way with words.

[Kevin Wayne]

I included an excerpt from the interview in my blog on MySpace.com (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=3138587&blogID=45216292&Mytoken=9D4DAB66-1D8E-4898-98F153CEE9E0223F270227859) which is prety cool. Sounds like the whole book would be worth it!

[Pilgrim]

I've been reading it and I am transfixed. It's really good stuff.

[Pilgrim]

Hey Kevin, have you ever heard Harrod and Funk or Jason Harrod? They were produced by Mark Heard, who had close ties to Bruce Cockburn. I noticed one of your infuences listed on your music page was Bruce Cockburn.

[Kevin Wayne]

Hey Kevin, have you ever heard Harrod and Funk or Jason Harrod? They were produced by Mark Heard, who had close ties to Bruce Cockburn. I noticed one of your infuences listed on your music page was Bruce Cockburn.


Haven't heard them, no. Mark Heard was awesome...

[anthrogirl]

:candle:

Bono...


:candle:

ag

[nyaminche]

Because...love needs to find a form, intimacy needs to be whispered. To me, it makes sense. It's actually logical. It's pure logic. Essence has to manifest itself. It's inevitable. Love has to become action or something concrete. It would have to happen. There must be an incarnation. Love must be made flesh.



Never mind the incarnation ~2000 yrs ago. This speaks directly to us.
Now doesn't this perfectly describe what is required of us as Christians?
If we as Christians do not show God's love to the world, who will?

[Ryokan]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?
Its a nice way of describing the Christian position, but it doesn't speak alot to people who don't already believe in the philosophy. Sorry. :shrug:

[Thomas2003]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

Couple of thoughts. Have no idea who "Bono" is, have no idea who "Michka Assayas" is and finally, the quote seemed new age and in the pagan stream of thought to me.

[Pilgrim]

Its a nice way of describing the Christian position, but it doesn't speak alot to people who don't already believe in the philosophy. Sorry. :shrug:
Fair question. What I was thinking might generate conversation for those not already buying into the world view is the comment by Bono regarding the logic of the incarnation. Specifically, "essence has to manifest itself."

[Pilgrim]

Couple of thoughts. Have no idea who "Bono" is, have no idea who "Michka Assayas" is and finally, the quote seemed new age and in the pagan stream of thought to me.
Bono is the lead singer of U2. Maybe one of the most famous men in the world. And Michka is a journalist who has followed the band since 1980.

I have to disagree with the new age assesment. As far as I can see this is a profoundly heterodox understanding of the incarnation expressed in wonderful language.

[Ryokan]

Fair question. What I was thinking might generate conversation for those not already buying into the world view is the comment by Bono regarding the logic of the incarnation. Specifically, "essence has to manifest itself."
Okay, there is love. A word that exists in most, but not all, human languages. It is a human concept. Love's "essence", whatever that may be, has no reason to manifest itself than hate, annoyance, or tiredness. As far as our living in a universe of love? That presumes a diety of love in the first place.
And all of these ideas, really, suggests Bono holds a kinda Platoesque world view that almost all nontheist, and many theists, don't subscribe to.

[Nang]

Okay, there is love. A word that exists in most, but not all, human languages. It is a human concept. Love's "essence", whatever that may be, has no reason to manifest itself than hate, annoyance, or tiredness. As far as our living in a universe of love? That presumes a diety of love in the first place.
And all of these ideas, really, suggests Bono holds a kinda Platoesque world view that almost all nontheist, and many theists, don't subscribe to.

The words "love" and "incarnation" and "diety" do not theology make.

IMO this discussion belongs on the Philosophy 201 Board.

Nang

[Thomas2003]

Bono is the lead singer of U2. Maybe one of the most famous men in the world. And Michka is a journalist who has followed the band since 1980.

Well, never heard of him or U2, so he's not that famous. Kind of funny actually, by your famous comment. Recently, I made a joke at Church and referenced Jim Nabors as his character in Gomer Pyle USMC. My pastor had absolutely no idea who or what I was talking about - he's never owned a television. Which I don't listen to very much music, don't turn on a radio and very seldom watch tv. I suspect you'll see me in the same light I did him.

I have to disagree with the new age assesment. As far as I can see this is a profoundly heterodox understanding of the incarnation expressed in wonderful language.

I presumed from the introduction that it was intended to be considered as Christian, but outside of that introduction it appears pagan to me. An incarnation is not a uniquely Christian idea, Pharoah claimed it and Moses rejected it. And it was repeatedly proclaimed based upon logic in virtually ever social order following, but God prohibited Moloch worship - so denying the claim was part and parcel of orthodoxy. When Christ was incarante, it was an entirely logical and necessary conclusion for Virgil to declare that "the turning point of the ages had come" when a strange star shown in heaven and Octavian Caesar became Augustus Caesar, an incarnation of divinity, and it was entirely logical for Rome to proclaim: [i]"There is none other name under heaven whereby men may be saved than the name of Augustus Caesar."

His language is not profound, it is rather similar to ancient paganism and the thinking that derived it seems to be the same source, not Scripture. As to his music, I would say, Caveat Emptor.

[infide]

Well, never heard of him or U2, so he's not that famous. Kind of funny actually, by your famous comment. Recently, I made a joke at Church and referenced Jim Nabors as his character in Gomer Pyle USMC. My pastor had absolutely no idea who or what I was talking about - he's never owned a television. Which I don't listen to very much music, don't turn on a radio and very seldom watch tv. I suspect you'll see me in the same light I did him.



I presumed from the introduction that it was intended to be considered as Christian, but outside of that introduction it appears pagan to me. An incarnation is not a uniquely Christian idea, Pharoah claimed it and Moses rejected it. And it was repeatedly proclaimed based upon logic in virtually ever social order following, but God prohibited Moloch worship - so denying the claim was part and parcel of orthodoxy. When Christ was incarante, it was an entirely logical and necessary conclusion for Virgil to declare that "the turning point of the ages had come" when a strange star shown in heaven and Octavian Caesar became Augustus Caesar, an incarnation of divinity, and it was entirely logical for Rome to proclaim: [i]"There is none other name under heaven whereby men may be saved than the name of Augustus Caesar."

His language is not profound, it is rather similar to ancient paganism and the thinking that derived it seems to be the same source, not Scripture. As to his music, I would say, Caveat Emptor.

sigh...

A demon under every rock and a pagan behind every microphone?

he is talking about the idea of incarnation - there had to be a true instance of it. Sure other cultures had it, pagan or otherwise - but that only further proves the point. The idea of incarnation, that if a loving deity exists, He would be made manifest, is powerful and inevitable.

peace,
jd

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

A demon under every rock and a pagan behind every microphone?

Hey! Thats My motto! Hands off.


























Not really.

[Thomas2003]

sigh...

A demon under every rock and a pagan behind every microphone?

:sigh: Clearly I was addressing the philosophy behind the assertion. Has this tarnished your idol?

he is talking about the idea of incarnation - there had to be a true instance of it. Sure other cultures had it, pagan or otherwise - but that only further proves the point. The idea of incarnation, that if a loving deity exists, He would be made manifest, is powerful and inevitable.

Exactly, he is talking about the idea of incarnation - that is the problem - he is not making a testimony from Revelation of Scripture, but from an idea of incarnation. The idea of incarnation is pagan in it's roots - not Christian.

The pagan idea of incarnation applied in the name of Christ can pervert Christianity beyond recognition and has in history. The problem is that the idea of incarnation results in the incarnation of the idea and not Christ. And when Christ is approached from this presupposition it is the incarnation of the idea that is asserted in his name. It was this idea of incarnation that both Arius and Nestorius preconceived when they approached the Revelation of the Logos.

The Greek Logos is not the Scriptural Logos, but if you approach the Scriptural Logos in terms of Greek thought your faith will become shipwrecked.

[8320john]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

:)-

From theology to U2 and Bono.

May I ask the average age of those posting to this thread? :)-

[infide]

:sigh: Clearly I was addressing the philosophy behind the assertion. Has this tarnished your idol?

No, because I actually get what He's saying...

Exactly, he is talking about the idea of incarnation - that is the problem - he is not making a testimony from Revelation of Scripture, but from an idea of incarnation. The idea of incarnation is pagan in it's roots - not Christian.

WHAT!? Youre giving to the pagans that which is God's? How can the idea of incarnation not be traced precisely to the mind of the True God, of whom, the Son would be incarnated? Just because some pagan culture instantiated the idea in one of their stories doesnt make the idea theirs.

The problem is that the idea of incarnation results in the incarnation of the idea and not Christ. And when Christ is approached from this presupposition it is the incarnation of the idea that is asserted in his name. It was this idea of incarnation that both Arius and Nestorius preconceived when they approached the Revelation of the Logos.

And apparently most of the ECF who were Logos theologians, you would have to say. The idea of incarnation was just an idea until Christ made it a reality. I dont see how you can be against the idea if you are for the true instantiation of it.

The Greek Logos is not the Scriptural Logos, but if you approach the Scriptural Logos in terms of Greek thought your faith will become shipwrecked.

Many of the early theologians did just that! (study early Logos Christology and you will see what I'm talking about) We call them great men of faith, not shipwrecked (though some undoubtedly did...) in faith.

peace,
jd

[BenK]

22Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you.

24"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.'

God is more than a god, not less; Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about 'parallels' and 'Pagan Christs': they ought to be there - it would be a stumbling block if they weren't. ... For this is the marriage of heaven and earth: Perfect Myth and Perfect Fact: claiming not only our love and our obedience, but also our wonder and delight, addressed to the savage, the child, and the poet in each one of us no less than to the moralist, the scholar, and the philosopher.

[Cleombrotus]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

Appealing to Bono to support my faith is like appealing to the owner of Curves, (the strictly female health spa) who also claims the title of "Christian".

I wholeheartedly agree with Thomas 2003.

I suggest re-examining your priorities.

[Kevin Wayne]

Just a little FYI for everyone here: Bono is speaking to his interviewer who is a professed non-believer, and one certainly does that differently than they would otherwise. He also uses the CS Lewis apologetic "Liar, Lunatic or Lord" to assert that Christ was The Messiah. It's on the link to my MySpace site.

[Pilgrim]

Well, never heard of him or U2, so he's not that famous.

Ah, becausse Thomas has never heard of him he's not that famous, never mind that he has been nominated to run the world bank. That he meets regularly with presidents and world leaders and that the Band U2 is one of the top all time sellers in rock and roll.

And yes, if your understanding of well known centers on characters of 1950's sit coms, then yeah, you're kind of in the same postion. You see, the world moved on after 1959.

I presumed from the introduction that it was intended to be considered as Christian, but outside of that introduction it appears pagan to me. An incarnation is not a uniquely Christian idea, Pharoah claimed it and Moses rejected it. And it was repeatedly proclaimed based upon logic in virtually ever social order following, but God prohibited Moloch worship - so denying the claim was part and parcel of orthodoxy. When Christ was incarante, it was an entirely logical and necessary conclusion for Virgil to declare that "the turning point of the ages had come" when a strange star shown in heaven and Octavian Caesar became Augustus Caesar, an incarnation of divinity, and it was entirely logical for Rome to proclaim: [i]"There is none other name under heaven whereby men may be saved than the name of Augustus Caesar."

His language is not profound, it is rather similar to ancient paganism and the thinking that derived it seems to be the same source, not Scripture. As to his music, I would say, Caveat Emptor.

Except that in context he is refering to Jesus Christ. Kind of gives a little more structure to it than your nebulous pagan referance.

He is expressing his profound emotional response to a God, our God, who would reach into our world and take on our form so that we might understand him better. It's really simple actually.

Oh by the way, I said heterodox earlier when I meant to say orthodox.

[Pilgrim]

Again, in Context, he is talking about scripture. He had just been reading the Christmas Story as he sat in worship on Christmas eve at St. Patricks in Dublin. It was totally a movement of the Spirit rooted in scripture.

[Pilgrim]

:)-

From theology to U2 and Bono.

May I ask the average age of those posting to this thread? :)-
Pilgrim is 35 today!

[Pilgrim]

Appealing to Bono to support my faith is like appealing to the owner of Curves, (the strictly female health spa) who also claims the title of "Christian".

I wholeheartedly agree with Thomas 2003.

I suggest re-examining your priorities.
Don't be pedantic. I'm not appealing for support, simply posting a quote from someone that I felt had a ring of truth to it.

It's amazing how argumentative some people need to be on these things. Especially when they really don't have to much knowledge of the subject matter.

[brother vinny]

Pilgrim is 35 today!

Welcome to 35, Pilgrim. I've been here for about 4 months now, and it's pretty much the same as 34.

Edited to add: Bono is almost exactly ten years older than me.

[Pilgrim]

Welcome to 35, Pilgrim. I've been here for about 4 months now, and it's pretty much the same as 34.

Edited to add: Bono is almost exactly ten years older than me.
Sorryto hear that! But hey, if you put me and Mrs. Pilgrim together, we're 70! That's gtta count for something right?

[Thomas2003]

Ah, becausse Thomas has never heard of him he's not that famous, never mind that he has been nominated to run the world bank. That he meets regularly with presidents and world leaders and that the Band U2 is one of the top all time sellers in rock and roll.

The point still stands, he may be famous within a certain paradigm, but not everyone lives in the worlds paradigm.

I stopped listening to rock and roll decades ago, and if I would it would probably be decades old rock and roll. I've heard some of the new stuff, it doesn't even purport to have a cause, like its origins, it seems to be more like raw jungle music with the main purpose of stirring up sexual energies.

At the least the 60's children had meaning, it was wrong, but it was an ideaology they were expressing - modernists stand upon that ground but have nothing to offer but raw sin. When I see little strumpets like Britney Spears and many others in that theme, it's just glorifying jungle life.

Society may put them on the covers of all their magazines and hold them up as idols - and while you make fun of traditional American morality, there was a day when it was rather consistent with Biblical morality and the common man didn't glorify sluts as the standard for their daughters.

I just decided if I was going to believe the Bible I wasn't going to live in the Jungle - and yes, I do hear the drums from time to time, especially as I am sitting at stop lights or parking my car in parking lots. It is foreign to me.


And yes, if your understanding of well known centers on characters of 1950's sit coms, then yeah, you're kind of in the same postion. You see, the world moved on after 1959.

No, that's not the point - but it doesn't matter as I really don't think you'd understand the point with a response like this.



Except that in context he is refering to Jesus Christ. Kind of gives a little more structure to it than your nebulous pagan referance.

But so was Arius and Nestorius. I'm not saying the man is pagan, I don't know that, I'm just expressing my first impression in contrast to everyone elses impression. I see it as dangerous soil that with a good hard rain becomes quicksand.


He is expressing his profound emotional response to a God, our God, who would reach into our world and take on our form so that we might understand him better. It's really simple actually.

Oh by the way, I said heterodox earlier when I meant to say orthodox.

So were Arius, Nestorius, Pelagius &c. Your statement that he's expressing an emotional response is a good interpretation of that instead. I see the need for a Spiritual expression, a Scriptural expression - especially if witnessing to a lost person, but if an emotional expression is correct I think it is consistent with the unstable personality of entertainers as a whole.

[brother vinny]

I stopped listening to rock and roll decades ago, and if I would it would probably be decades old rock and roll. I've heard some of the new stuff, it doesn't even purport to have a cause, like its origins, it seems to be more like raw jungle music with the main purpose of stirring up sexual energies.

Proof positive that this man has never listened to U2.

[Kevin Wayne]

I stopped listening to rock and roll decades ago, and if I would it would probably be decades old rock and roll. I've heard some of the new stuff, it doesn't even purport to have a cause, like its origins, it seems to be more like raw jungle music with the main purpose of stirring up sexual energies.

At the least the 60's children had meaning, it was wrong, but it was an ideaology they were expressing - modernists stand upon that ground but have nothing to offer but raw sin. When I see little strumpets like Britney Spears and many others in that theme, it's just glorifying jungle life.



U2 is a 60's band,,. just born 15 years too late! ;-)

[Pilgrim]

The point still stands, he may be famous within a certain paradigm, but not everyone lives in the worlds paradigm.

I stopped listening to rock and roll decades ago, and if I would it would probably be decades old rock and roll. I've heard some of the new stuff, it doesn't even purport to have a cause, like its origins, it seems to be more like raw jungle music with the main purpose of stirring up sexual energies.

At the least the 60's children had meaning, it was wrong, but it was an ideaology they were expressing - modernists stand upon that ground but have nothing to offer but raw sin. When I see little strumpets like Britney Spears and many others in that theme, it's just glorifying jungle life.

Society may put them on the covers of all their magazines and hold them up as idols - and while you make fun of traditional American morality, there was a day when it was rather consistent with Biblical morality and the common man didn't glorify sluts as the standard for their daughters.

I just decided if I was going to believe the Bible I wasn't going to live in the Jungle - and yes, I do hear the drums from time to time, especially as I am sitting at stop lights or parking my car in parking lots. It is foreign to me.




No, that's not the point - but it doesn't matter as I really don't think you'd understand the point with a response like this.





But so was Arius and Nestorius. I'm not saying the man is pagan, I don't know that, I'm just expressing my first impression in contrast to everyone elses impression. I see it as dangerous soil that with a good hard rain becomes quicksand.




So were Arius, Nestorius, Pelagius &c. Your statement that he's expressing an emotional response is a good interpretation of that instead. I see the need for a Spiritual expression, a Scriptural expression - especially if witnessing to a lost person, but if an emotional expression is correct I think it is consistent with the unstable personality of entertainers as a whole.
Ok, this has to be said, your post is extremly racist with its reference to "jungle music" You may want to re think that post.

To respond to the content, there is nothing pagan in the writing. In context it is clear that the man is expressing his deep joy at the incarnation. It is clear from listening to U2's lyrics that this is a man on a deep spiritual journey. The only paganism that creeps into this at all is that which is in your imagination.

There is nothing in the quote itself that justifies your deep suspicion. It seems as if you are intentionally seeking out division on this which seems counter to Christ's hope for us.

[Pilgrim]

U2 is a 60's band,,. just born 15 years too late! ;-)
That and can you believe he tried to put Brittney Spears and Bono in the same genre? I find it's typically better to just not talk about stuff you don't have information on.

[Thomas2003]

Ok, this has to be said, your post is extremly racist with its reference to "jungle music" You may want to re think that post.

Oh good grief, why would I re-think that? Just in case you don't grasp what I'm talking about I'll explain it a bit. Music is a gift of God that we are to glorify God in and it has always been an expression of worship out of the depth of man's heart. Culture is religion externalized, jungle music is a popular expression of the savage and pagan culture of Africa and South America, always has been. Still is to this day, and it represents pagan worship and idolatry very well - and it's always been coupled to sexual perversions, which Scripture always represents together.

Jungle type music and paganism go hand in hand today in America - the heart of "rock and roll" is derived from a glorifying of paganism and its ancient sexual rituals. Elvis Presley was a good example of that, and "rock and roll" has slid more and more down a moral slope the more it has rooted itself into the savagery of the jungle. All of the modernists have made peddling sex part and parcel of music today. If you get a young lady today that may have some talent, for example, she will never rise to "stardom" until she starts peddlling her body sexually. Her behavior has to become remniscient of ancient temple prostitutes or she won't make the charts.

But there's no hatred in recognizing that as you charge. How in the world do you even come up with that?

Check out Peter Hammond's ministry ("http://www.frontline.org.za/), you can learn some reality of the jungle there - it's downright savage. Life is meaningless in that culture, it must be overcome, not glorified. What is "racism" is to glorify it and join antichrist forces against the Kingdom of God being afraid to call sin what it is.



To respond to the content, there is nothing pagan in the writing. In context it is clear that the man is expressing his deep joy at the incarnation. It is clear from listening to U2's lyrics that this is a man on a deep spiritual journey. The only paganism that creeps into this at all is that which is in your imagination.

May be, I don't know the man - I was just commenting on the thread and it is remarkably similar to historical logical conclusions - so it isn't entirely imagination, but a different frame of reference.

There is nothing in the quote itself that justifies your deep suspicion. It seems as if you are intentionally seeking out division on this which seems counter to Christ's hope for us.

Well, we are to be wise and on guard

[Kevin Wayne]

And thus what began as joy & unity over the Testimony of a brother in Christ has devolved into squabble. And guess who is responsible for al of that...?

[Anoetos]

Bono is right and orthodox.

[Pilgrim]

Bono is right and orthodox.
Well there you have it! The definitive answer! :thumb:

[Anoetos]

Thank you very much, next week I'll be solving the Calvinist/Arminian argument.

Stay Tuned.

[Pilgrim]

:popcorn:

[brother vinny]

And thus what began as joy & unity over the Testimony of a brother in Christ has devolved into squabble. And guess who is responsible for al of that...?

Er, the flesh?

[Nang]

Bono is right and orthodox.

Oh, sure . . .

It is purely orthodox to call grace a "she."

:eww:

Nang
(Aware you speak in jest.)

[Kevin Wayne]

Er, the flesh?

Or someone walking in it...


Oh, sure . . .

It is purely orthodox to call grace a "she."


Pr 1:20 - Wisdom calls out in the street;
she raises her voice in the public squares.

Pr 4:6 - Don't abandon wisdom, and she will watch over you;
love her, and she will guard you.

Pr 9:1 - Wisdom has built her house;
she has carved out her seven pillars.

Pr 14:33 - Wisdom resides in the heart of the discerning;
she is known even among fools

[Pilgrim]

Oh, sure . . .

It is purely orthodox to call grace a "she."

:eww:

Nang
(Aware you speak in jest.)
There's certainly nothing unorthodox about it so I'm not sure what your point is? That's a great line "Grace carries the world on her hip."

It certainly reflects the scripture where god is described as a mother gathering her children and it's a nice counterpoint to the non scriptural picture of a man carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders.

[Amazing Rando]

And thus what began as joy & unity over the Testimony of a brother in Christ has devolved into squabble. And guess who is responsible for al of that...?

I dunno Kevin, you make "jungle music" on the side, don't you? Why should Thomas listen to a maker of jungle music? :wink:

[Cleombrotus]

Oh good grief, why would I re-think that? Just in case you don't grasp what I'm talking about I'll explain it a bit. Music is a gift of God that we are to glorify God in and it has always been an expression of worship out of the depth of man's heart. Culture is religion externalized, jungle music is a popular expression of the savage and pagan culture of Africa and South America, always has been. Still is to this day, and it represents pagan worship and idolatry very well - and it's always been coupled to sexual perversions, which Scripture always represents together.

Jungle type music and paganism go hand in hand today in America - the heart of "rock and roll" is derived from a glorifying of paganism and its ancient sexual rituals. Elvis Presley was a good example of that, and "rock and roll" has slid more and more down a moral slope the more it has rooted itself into the savagery of the jungle. All of the modernists have made peddling sex part and parcel of music today. If you get a young lady today that may have some talent, for example, she will never rise to "stardom" until she starts peddlling her body sexually. Her behavior has to become remniscient of ancient temple prostitutes or she won't make the charts.

But there's no hatred in recognizing that as you charge. How in the world do you even come up with that?

Check out Peter Hammond's ministry ("http://www.frontline.org.za/), you can learn some reality of the jungle there - it's downright savage. Life is meaningless in that culture, it must be overcome, not glorified. What is "racism" is to glorify it and join antichrist forces against the Kingdom of God being afraid to call sin what it is.





May be, I don't know the man - I was just commenting on the thread and it is remarkably similar to historical logical conclusions - so it isn't entirely imagination, but a different frame of reference.



Well, we are to be wise and on guard

Thomas, you 'da man.

[brother vinny]

Thomas, you 'da man.

If'n you say so, boss. :no:

[Cleombrotus]

If'n you say so, boss. :no:


Basically, if I read him right, what he is saying is, you can't get to the Spirit through the flesh.

I quite agree.

I wonder if Bono gets that.

[Amazing Rando]

What makes you think Bono is a child of the flesh rather than the Spirit? is it the fact that he makes "Jungle music?" :hehe:

[brother vinny]

I think we're supposed to live in the jungle, just not be of the jungle.

[Cleombrotus]

What makes you think Bono is a child of the flesh rather than the Spirit? is it the fact that he makes "Jungle music?" :hehe:


Who said he thought Bono is a "child of the flesh", whatever that means?

[infide]

I think we're supposed to live in the jungle, just not be of the jungle.

:rofl:

pearls for that one..

peace,
jd

[Cleombrotus]

:rofl:

pearls for that one..

peace,
jd


That is quite good.

[john-philip]

Oh good grief, why would I re-think that? Just in case you don't grasp what I'm talking about I'll explain it a bit. Music is a gift of God that we are to glorify God in and it has always been an expression of worship out of the depth of man's heart. Culture is religion externalized, jungle music is a popular expression of the savage and pagan culture of Africa and South America, always has been. Still is to this day, and it represents pagan worship and idolatry very well - and it's always been coupled to sexual perversions, which Scripture always represents together.

Jungle type music and paganism go hand in hand today in America - the heart of "rock and roll" is derived from a glorifying of paganism and its ancient sexual rituals. Elvis Presley was a good example of that, and "rock and roll" has slid more and more down a moral slope the more it has rooted itself into the savagery of the jungle. All of the modernists have made peddling sex part and parcel of music today. If you get a young lady today that may have some talent, for example, she will never rise to "stardom" until she starts peddlling her body sexually. Her behavior has to become remniscient of ancient temple prostitutes or she won't make the charts.

But there's no hatred in recognizing that as you charge. How in the world do you even come up with that?

Check out Peter Hammond's ministry ("http://www.frontline.org.za/), you can learn some reality of the jungle there - it's downright savage. Life is meaningless in that culture, it must be overcome, not glorified. What is "racism" is to glorify it and join antichrist forces against the Kingdom of God being afraid to call sin what it is.





May be, I don't know the man - I was just commenting on the thread and it is remarkably similar to historical logical conclusions - so it isn't entirely imagination, but a different frame of reference.



Well, we are to be wise and on guard

Hi Thomas. I want to be sure of what you are saying before I respond. Are you saying that "Jungle Music" is necessarily bad due it's use for (or roots in) idolatrous purposes in pagan cultures?

[Amazing Rando]

Who said he thought Bono is a "child of the flesh", whatever that means?

You inferred that you believe that Bono attempts to "get to the Spirit through the flesh." I'd just like to know your grounds for this suspicion.

[Kevin Wayne]

I dunno Kevin, you make "jungle music" on the side, don't you? Why should Thomas listen to a maker of jungle music? :wink:



He shouldn't! After all I'm also an "Evil Arminian Guerilla Theology-Tactic Creed Ignoring, Non-KJV reading, Authority Denying Jungle Music maker." OOoooo better watch out for me!


:lol:


Sorry couldn't resist....

[Cleombrotus]

You inferred that you believe that Bono attempts to "get to the Spirit through the flesh." I'd just like to know your grounds for this suspicion.


I think Thomas summed it up far better than I could:

Clearly I was addressing the philosophy behind the assertion. Has this tarnished your idol?

As I now see it, the issue is two-fold.

One, your understanding of the effects and influence of Rock music relative to your understanding of what constitutes Christian life, and

Two, your reason for being impressed with Mr. Bono.

When you begin to see what the effects of today's popular music has been and continues to be, particularly on the young, you also will question how deep the understanding is of those who can nicely articulate the basic premise of Christianity and yet still employ it in their "ministry", and perhaps you will be less impressed by them as apparently you still are.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

[Amazing Rando]

I think Thomas summed it up far better than I could:



As I now see it, the issue is two-fold.

One, your understanding of the effects and influence of Rock music relative to your understanding of what constitutes Christian life, and

:poke: Music itself is completely morally neutral. It all depends on how its used. It's a medium. What matters is the message.

Two, your reason for being impressed with Mr. Bono.

When you begin to see what the effects of today's popular music has been and continues to be, particularly on the young, you also will question how deep the understanding is of those who can nicely articulate the basic premise of Christianity and yet still employ it in their "ministry", and perhaps you will be less impressed by them as apparently you still are.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

Cleo, what in the world do you have against musicians? :lolo:

[7thangel]

I wasn't sure where I wanted to put this. This seems the best place. However, as the thread starter and an Admin. Assistant I welcom non thiest input because of the fame of the person I am quoting below.

The following is a quote from Bono as recorded in Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1573223093/qid=1126832129/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7462848-7734431?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) Copy right considerations have been followed.



I don't know about you, but I find that amazingly well said. It is pure logic. It makes me think that to deny the incarnation, to deny the divine is to take rational thought to its most irrational conclusion.

Thought?

I would doubt if you "totally" agree with bono about what his saying. Would you try make an experiment and try to replace the word "love" in his statement with "evil." His statement will certainly still be true, and "logical."

And then, try to imagine if this world has no evil, and where will this love of God be? Will it be logical on our part to presume that God must, or intended perhaps, to create evil for us to know love?



Bono's words are too simple, I believe. He is just stating how wonderful it is that we experience things, either good or evil, for in them we learn. And that is even told us by Paul in Romans 1:20. I am amazed that you still have to learn from sources like Bono.


.

[Cleombrotus]

:poke: Music itself is completely morally neutral. It all depends on how its used. It's a medium. What matters is the message.

We are completely in agreement here. As a student of Classical music theory and an aspiring pianist, I couldn't have said it better.

However, when you begin to understand how Rock music and most of today's popular music is a message, you may think twice about your affinity for it.



What in the world do you have against musicians? :lolo:

I will assume this is said in jest.

[john-philip]

We are completely in agreement here. As a student of Classical music theory and an aspiring pianist, I couldn't have said it better.

However, when you begin to understand how Rock music and most of today's popular music is a message, you may think twice about your affinity for it.

Cleo, how is the music per se a message?

[Cleombrotus]

Cleo, how is the music per se a message?


What it appeals to and where it directs the listener's attention.

[infide]

Cleo, how is the music per se a message?

you know, jp - its when a beat or tempo sounds good to the ears, might make you want to dance or have fun - those things are straight up from hell.

no matter who is playing the music, or what their lyrics are like, it must be evil by association. Marilyn Manson and Bono are just birds of a feather.

give me a freakin break, cleo and thom, and while youre at it, grow up.

peace,
jd

[john-philip]

What it appeals to and where it directs the listener's attention.

Okay, Cleo, let's speak in generalities. What message does dissonance, especially unresolved dissonance send? What message does asymmetrical rhythms send? How about boisterous dynamics? Unconventional harmonic changes? Imperfect cadances? What about the undue empshasis on the leading tone in the majore scale?

If music sends inherit messages and appeals necessarily to certain desires, wouldn't you think all these things would be inherently evil? As a classical pianist, you need to throw out Schuman, Beethoven, Debussy, Stravinsky, Chopin, and many others. And be careful what you study in music theory. It could appeal to certain desires, and the inherit message of evil might cause you to stumble.

You might as well throw out Bach, also. The church of the middle ages prohibited the use of major scales (aka ionian modes) in their music for a reason. They felt the leading tone created, or at least appealed to, unnatural or evil desires in music, so they stuck with the modes in their Gregorian Chants. It was those evil renaissance composers who had to go and change things. You may want to consider something more pre-renaissance for yourself.

[john-philip]

you know, jp - its when a beat or tempo sounds good to the ears, might make you want to dance or have fun - those things are straight up from hell.

no matter who is playing the music, or what their lyrics are like, it must be evil by association. Marilyn Manson and Bono are just birds of a feather.

give me a freakin break, cleo and thom, and while youre at it, grow up.

peace,
jd

Yeah, sometimes the worst critics don't even know how to play an instrument or have studied music history (or at least classical music) back to it's beginnings. It seems to be different with Cleo, but I still don't think his position is at all tenable musically, historically, philosophically, or theologically,

[Cleombrotus]

you know, jp - its when a beat or tempo sounds good to the ears, might make you want to dance or have fun - those things are straight up from hell.

no matter who is playing the music, or what their lyrics are like, it must be evil by association. Marilyn Manson and Bono are just birds of a feather.

give me a freakin break, cleo and thom, and while youre at it, grow up.

peace,
jd


jd,

If it is "growing up" you are suggesting I do, I think you could provide a better example of what that looks like, don't you think?

peace, yourself.

Cleombrotus

[brother vinny]

I happen to like some of Marylin Manson's stuff.

:eek:

[Amazing Rando]

:flaming:

[Cleombrotus]

Okay, Cleo, let's speak in generalities. What message does dissonance, especially unresolved dissonance send? What message does asymmetrical rhythms send? How about boisterous dynamics? Unconventional harmonic changes? Imperfect cadances? What about the undue empshasis on the leading tone in the majore scale?

If music sends inherit messages and appeals necessarily to certain desires, wouldn't you think all these things would be inherently evil? As a classical pianist, you need to throw out Schuman, Beethoven, Debussy, Stravinsky, Chopin, and many others. And be careful what you study in music theory. It could appeal to certain desires, and the inherit message of evil might cause you to stumble.

You might as well throw out Bach, also. The church of the middle ages prohibited the use of major scales (aka ionian modes) in their music for a reason. They felt the leading tone created, or at least appealed to, unnatural or evil desires in music, so they stuck with the modes in their Gregorian Chants. It was those evil renaissance composers who had to go and change things. You may want to consider something more pre-renaissance for yourself.


john-philip,

It is obvious that someone's sacred cows are being skewered here and the emotions necessarily run high when that happens.

I might suggest that when that does happen, the proper remedy is to take a deep breath, count to ten, and re-evaluate what one thinks is actually being said. It might also be helpful to consider why it is that the emotional response occurs in the first place.

On a strictly human side note: If you wish to place Bach et al and Bono et al on the same musical plane, be my guest. But I probably won't be reading any of your musical criticisms nor attending any of your classes on Music Appreciation.


Like I said, you can't get to the Spirit through the flesh. But you can try, if you like. "All things are lawful". I will give Bono the benefit of the doubt and allow that he still has some growing to do. As do we all.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

[eudyptes]

john-philip,

It is obvious that someone's sacred cows are being skewered here and the emotions necessarily run high when that happens.

I might suggest that when that does happen, the proper remedy is to take a deep breath, count to ten, and re-evaluate what one thinks is actually being said. It might also be helpful to consider why it is that the emotional response occurs in the first place.

On a strictly human side note: If you wish to place Bach et al and Bono et al on the same musical plane, be my guest. But I probably won't be reading any of your musical criticisms nor attending any of your classes on Music Appreciation.


Like I said, you can't get to the Spirit through the flesh. But you can try, if you like. "All things are lawful". I will give Bono the benefit of the doubt and allow that he still has some growing to do. As do we all.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

Cleombrotus,

I'd be interested in your clarifying (not sure if that's the right term...maybe expounding on) your position. Is it the musical style or the lyrical content that you are opposed to in rock music -as it goes in this discussion. Do you believe that a theologically sound message can be delivered through the use of a "rock beat"?

If your objections are to the style of music I do think J-P brings up some interesting questions - and the Bach/Bono comparison would be valid - at least as far as church history is concerned (disregarding personal taste and musical style). If it's with Bono himself and not the musical style...well then that's a different discussion altogether.

[Kevin Wayne]

I think Thomas summed it up far better than I could:



As I now see it, the issue is two-fold.

One, your understanding of the effects and influence of Rock music relative to your understanding of what constitutes Christian life, and

Two, your reason for being impressed with Mr. Bono.

When you begin to see what the effects of today's popular music has been and continues to be, particularly on the young, you also will question how deep the understanding is of those who can nicely articulate the basic premise of Christianity and yet still employ it in their "ministry", and perhaps you will be less impressed by them as apparently you still are.

Regards,
Cleombrotus



You do believe that humans have fallen and have always been depraved, correct?


Then you will understand my point... there's no "effects" of today’s music that makes people worse than they ever were. We already hit bottom after the fall and nothing makes us any worse than we ever were. If it wasn’t' music, it was something else.




Bono's words are too simple, I believe. He is just stating how wonderful it is that we experience things, either good or evil, for in them we learn. And that is even told us by Paul in Romans 1:20. I am amazed that you still have to learn from sources like Bono.






Who's "learning" anything?



Look, maybe this will help: U2 is a band that came out of a turbulent, war-torn country (Ireland) that experienced conversion to Christ though a radical, independent Charismatic house-church group known as Shiloh Ministries. Early on the bass player was the only-non-believer- not sure if that's ever changed. Bono's Father is Catholic, his Mother Protestant. They aren't seminary students with their theological ducks in a row. And you certainly can't hold them up to American Evangelical standards because Europeans don't think that way.


Early on, U2 maintained close ties with Shiloh, but as time went on and they became more & more famous, kids started showing up for meetings obviously just to meet the band. Evetually they dropped out.


They used to put out music that was blatantly Christian, or at least unusually so for a band that records on a secular label. As time went on they became somewhat leery of the media attention they were getting, and being young, started to say things in interviews that made you wonder just how deep their faith ever could have been. Especially Bono. Pretty soon even his most ardent defenders began to roll their eyes up at things he was saying. “Does Bono even know where he’s at?” – we would say. Did he have a crisis in faith or just wasn’t grounded yet? Probably either or both.


Eventually most of the Christian content disappeared out of U2’s lyrics, except for songs that seem to question God in kind of a Psalmist sense. More recently, Bono seems to have become comfortable with the fact that his band has a unique place in the world to be able to raise issues about God, and has started writing lyrics that reflect his faith again..


He’s a fan of C.S. Lewis, as evident by what he says on my blog, if you read it. (I’ve read other things over the years where he mentioned Lewis.) I know some people think Lewis is wimpy, but for a Rock Star to even take a look at something like that is unusual. (Usually you get Madonna and her Kabala religion or something).


Is he a bit liberal Theologically? Probably. Is he a Christian? Seems as if all evidences point to that. Is he a whole lot deeper and has spent more time thinking about real issues than most entertainers? Yes. And fercryingoutloud- he’s talking to an Unsaved journalist! I think he’s going to phrase things a bit differently than if one of us were to talk to him.


I’m not “impressed” with Bono anymore than I would be impressed with, say D. Elton Trueblood, the Quaker author who was pretty Liberal in his younger days, but started to sound more Christ-centered as he grayed a little. Bono is starting to sound more like Trueblood and, less like the average starlet with the skimpy dress who thanks God for her Grammy award. Give him a break.. !



Oh, and for those who are engaging in the Bach thing- these days even the Universities are filled with those who put The Bealtles on a par with the Greats of the past. Not too hard to believe, since thier producer was a trained Classical musician.

[john-philip]

john-philip,

It is obvious that someone's sacred cows are being skewered here and the emotions necessarily run high when that happens.

I might suggest that when that does happen, the proper remedy is to take a deep breath, count to ten, and re-evaluate what one thinks is actually being said. It might also be helpful to consider why it is that the emotional response occurs in the first place.

Hi, Cleo. While I do feel strongly about the position, and I feel as though have put a lot of thought and study into the issue, I was not 'emotional' in my post. And I apologize if I came across that way, but pehraps there is just a clarity lacking between our positions that will resolve more as we progress in the discussion. Let me add that I do appreciate your tone and kindness in the way you've approached this discussion - sometimes this is too hard to find. I will be somewhat 'forceful' in my posts, but I will try to be charitable and open in the discussion.

Also, it may have seemed as though my questions were rhetorical - and perhaps in some way they were - but if any answer can be given, I would like to hear it. The problem is, I believe most who share criticisms of music such as yours, often are very inconsistent in their application. The root cause of that sometimes simply boils down to preference. For example, are there any styles of music that you just down right cannot stand, but that you find completely acceptable, morally (or in any sense) to listen to?


On a strictly human side note: If you wish to place Bach et al and Bono et al on the same musical plane, be my guest. But I probably won't be reading any of your musical criticisms nor attending any of your classes on Music Appreciation.

If you want to strawman my argument, sure. But "musical plane" had nothing to do with it. What I am wanting to get at is strictly the musical fundamentals that create this (alleged) appeal to certain desires in the music.
I see no reason to think that music can have any inherent appeal to certain desires. Now, hear me out - don't blithely dismiss my thinking here. I would agree that music can act as an aid to an emotional state and can be used to enhance present emotions, but I do not believe that it is inherent to any style of music, per se. Rather culture and preference play a large role in it. Look at the themes of many operas from classical through today: murder, betrayal, revenge, adultery - many of the same themes found in popular music. Why would they have such thematic materials if the music is not acting as an aid to express such ideas? And yet, at the same time, the same music can be used to express not only morally acceptable ideas, but morally praiseworthy ideas. (Without lyrics, even - depending on the compsers intentions.)

Nonetheless, I would still find it curious how one could maintain that one orginization of sounds and vibrations can appeal to immorality or evil, while another can appeal to something good, without the Bible even mentioning such. Surely we're not just supposed to take somebody's word on what music is inherently appealing to what.

Like I said, you can't get to the Spirit through the flesh. But you can try, if you like. "All things are lawful". I will give Bono the benefit of the doubt and allow that he still has some growing to do. As do we all.

But I think this applies to music across the board then - "music" (which has yet to even be defined in the discussion) is either natural or supernatural, and if you wish to maintain that some styles are the former while others are the latter, you need to establish some objective precedence for it. However, even that would seem to move us back to the medieval gregorian, modal styles.

[Pilgrim]

I would doubt if you "totally" agree with bono about what his saying. Would you try make an experiment and try to replace the word "love" in his statement with "evil." His statement will certainly still be true, and "logical."

And then, try to imagine if this world has no evil, and where will this love of God be? Will it be logical on our part to presume that God must, or intended perhaps, to create evil for us to know love?



Bono's words are too simple, I believe. He is just stating how wonderful it is that we experience things, either good or evil, for in them we learn. And that is even told us by Paul in Romans 1:20. I am amazed that you still have to learn from sources like Bono.


.
What's amazing is the level of condesension you show. All I was doing was posting a quote of another believer as it pertained to the incarnation. I felt the wording was poetically significant and beautifully put.

[BenK]

Hi, Cleo. While I do feel strongly about the position, and I feel as though have put a lot of thought and study into the issue, I was not 'emotional' in my post. And I apologize if I came across that way, but pehraps there is just a clarity lacking between our positions that will resolve more as we progress in the discussion.

You don't need to apologize. You didn't come accross as emotional in post #64, in fact you made a very salient point, one which I believe is decisive.

Post #69 is empty condescending ad hominem from start to finish.

[micah4]

Nonetheless, I would still find it curious how one could maintain that one orginization of sounds and vibrations can appeal to immorality or evil, while another can appeal to something good, without the Bible even mentioning such. Surely we're not just supposed to take somebody's word on what music is inherently appealing to what.


I would not be brave enough to venture any sort of objective measurable delimitations on what makes some organizations of sound and vibrations, rhythm or melody communicate immorality and what makes others communicate the opposite. But at the same time I think it would also be pretty bold to state with certainty that this is not the case with some forms.

All art- written word, visual art, music- communicates something of the mind of the artist. We're able to easily analyze and examine the written word- novels, essays, poems- and reason about it's contents, because that is the area of the brain that processes language. Musical forms are processed on a different level, but nevertheless they enter our mind and influence our thought patterns. I don't think it would be a reasonable critique to say of a magazine article or an essay, "how in the world can certain organizations of consonants and vowels be inherently moral or immoral?"- which seems to be what you've done to communication in the form of rhythm and melody. This is entirely overlooking the component of communication which is the essence of art. Written or spoken words, a painting on canvas, a collection of sounds; these are all forms of communication. At some level, the output reflects the inner thoughts of the artist generating the work; and at some level, that thought is communicated to us, and our minds at some level begin to reflect the patterns that are present in that communication when we are exposed to it. To flatly deny that music could be inherently moral or immoral would seem to me to be very near to denying that _any_ form of communication could be inherently moral or immoral. I'm not sure if you would go that far.

Now, despite all that, I wouldn't be so bold as to make a judgment call as to whether Bono's (or any other artist's) music is for good or for evil; but I don't think we can certainly conclude that musical forms are necessarily lacking a capacity to communicate a positive or negative message similar to the capacity which is present in other forms of communication, such as writing.

[infide]

jd,

If it is "growing up" you are suggesting I do, I think you could provide a better example of what that looks like, don't you think?

Probably, and maybe i need to grow up in other areas as well.

But rule number one of maturing in this sense is learning that there are very few sweeping generalizations that hold any merit. The most pious of Christians could glorify Christ in heavy metal, and a merely professing Christian could mock Christ in a worship team.

Just because some guy somewhere told you "rock music is evil" doesnt make it so. And thats not even because I am that huge of a fan of rock music either - I am just not a fan of ignorant prejudice of the kind that gives Christians in general a bad name.

peace,
jd

[Cleombrotus]

Hi, Cleo. While I do feel strongly about the position, and I feel as though have put a lot of thought and study into the issue, I was not 'emotional' in my post. And I apologize if I came across that way, but pehraps there is just a clarity lacking between our positions that will resolve more as we progress in the discussion. Let me add that I do appreciate your tone and kindness in the way you've approached this discussion - sometimes this is too hard to find. I will be somewhat 'forceful' in my posts, but I will try to be charitable and open in the discussion.

Also, it may have seemed as though my questions were rhetorical - and perhaps in some way they were - but if any answer can be given, I would like to hear it. The problem is, I believe most who share criticisms of music such as yours, often are very inconsistent in their application. The root cause of that sometimes simply boils down to preference. For example, are there any styles of music that you just down right cannot stand, but that you find completely acceptable, morally (or in any sense) to listen to?




If you want to strawman my argument, sure. But "musical plane" had nothing to do with it. What I am wanting to get at is strictly the musical fundamentals that create this (alleged) appeal to certain desires in the music.
I see no reason to think that music can have any inherent appeal to certain desires. Now, hear me out - don't blithely dismiss my thinking here. I would agree that music can act as an aid to an emotional state and can be used to enhance present emotions, but I do not believe that it is inherent to any style of music, per se. Rather culture and preference play a large role in it. Look at the themes of many operas from classical through today: murder, betrayal, revenge, adultery - many of the same themes found in popular music. Why would they have such thematic materials if the music is not acting as an aid to express such ideas? And yet, at the same time, the same music can be used to express not only morally acceptable ideas, but morally praiseworthy ideas. (Without lyrics, even - depending on the compsers intentions.)

Nonetheless, I would still find it curious how one could maintain that one orginization of sounds and vibrations can appeal to immorality or evil, while another can appeal to something good, without the Bible even mentioning such. Surely we're not just supposed to take somebody's word on what music is inherently appealing to what.



But I think this applies to music across the board then - "music" (which has yet to even be defined in the discussion) is either natural or supernatural, and if you wish to maintain that some styles are the former while others are the latter, you need to establish some objective precedence for it. However, even that would seem to move us back to the medieval gregorian, modal styles.


john-philip and eudypte,,

BenK's critique of my post is correct. I apologize for shooting from the hip. You did not deserve my smarminess. That should have been reserved for jd alone. :wink:

I do wish to respond to your posts and clarify what it is I am trying to get at, but will need some time to figure out the best way to put it that will not add further to the confusion. Suffice it to say at this point that it has less to do with music per se or Bono than most seem to think it does, although I think there is a lesson in that as well.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

P.S. The point about the comparison between Bach et al and Bono et al was not meant as an argument. Just a personal expression of my particular taste in music and quite irrelevant to the topic.

[Kevin Wayne]

john-philip and eudypte,,

BenK's critique of my post is correct. I apologize for shooting from the hip. You did not deserve my smarminess. That should have been reserved for jd alone. :wink:

I do wish to respond to your posts and clarify what it is I am trying to get at, but will need some time to figure out the best way to put it that will not add further to the confusion. Suffice it to say at this point that it has less to do with music per se or Bono than most seem to think it does, although I think there is a lesson in that as well.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

P.S. The point about the comparison between Bach et al and Bono et al was not meant as an argument. Just a personal expression of my particular taste in music and quite irrelevant to the topic.



I hope you would at least read my post re the bakcground of Bono/U2 so at least you have a clearer idea where he's coming from.

[Cleombrotus]

Probably, and maybe i need to grow up in other areas as well.

But rule number one of maturing in this sense is learning that there are very few sweeping generalizations that hold any merit. The most pious of Christians could glorify Christ in heavy metal, and a merely professing Christian could mock Christ in a worship team.

Just because some guy somewhere told you "rock music is evil" doesnt make it so. And thats not even because I am that huge of a fan of rock music either - I am just not a fan of ignorant prejudice of the kind that gives Christians in general a bad name.

peace,
jd


jd,

I will try to clarify what I am trying to get at shortly. At this point suffice it to say that I believe that "all things are lawful; but not all things are helpful", ok?

Regards,
Cleombrotus

[Cleombrotus]

I hope you would at least read my post re the bakcground of Bono/U2 so at least you have a clearer idea where he's coming from.


Kevin,

I did and found it very helpful and informative although I was already familar with the basics of the history. While I have not been a fan of U2/Bono, I have paid particular attention to him more so than most rock musicians since he was reportedly a Christian and I was always interested to see if, in his public appearances, his speech and behaviour might reflect that or not. This latest interview differs markedly from what I am used to seeing and hearing from him and I hope that he continues to move more in this direction rather than in the left-political/ angry-young-man vein I seem to hear him reference mostly.

But, as I am trying to indicate in my other responses, Bono is a side issue in all of this for me. My interest in him at this point is in the responses that the critique seems to have generated as I believe it to be illustrative of a deeper point.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

[Kevin Wayne]

This latest interview differs markedly from what I am used to seeing and hearing from him and I hope that he continues to move more in this direction rather than in the left-political/ angry-young-man vein I seem to hear him reference mostly.



Personally I like Left-wing angry young dudes. A guy named George Fox was one. Started the group I got saved in, too.


But, as I am trying to indicate in my other responses, Bono is a side issue in all of this for me. My interest in him at this point is in the responses that the critique seems to have generated as I believe it to be illustrative of a deeper point.

Regards,
Cleombrotus



Well I'll take your word for it until then, but for me I'm not so sure the whole issue is any deeper other than just people reacting emotionally to buzz words. Things like "pagan" and "jungle music" would set anyone off, so that you're more likely to get that kind of attitiude. A gut response set off several gut responses in return. Probably innocent enough on everoyone's part, but that's how we humanoids tend to process things.

[eudyptes]

john-philip and eudypte,,

BenK's critique of my post is correct. I apologize for shooting from the hip. You did not deserve my smarminess. That should have been reserved for jd alone. :wink:

I do wish to respond to your posts and clarify what it is I am trying to get at, but will need some time to figure out the best way to put it that will not add further to the confusion. Suffice it to say at this point that it has less to do with music per se or Bono than most seem to think it does, although I think there is a lesson in that as well.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

P.S. The point about the comparison between Bach et al and Bono et al was not meant as an argument. Just a personal expression of my particular taste in music and quite irrelevant to the topic.

Thanks for the openness and honesty here...in forums like this it's so easy to miss a point or take things a different way than initended, it's always good to make sure "we're all on the same page", it can save a lot of misunderstanding. We may still disagree, but at least we'll disagree actually knowing what the other person(s) really meant, instead of making assumptions.


Well I'll take your word for it until then, but for me I'm not so sure the whole issue is any deeper other than just people reacting emotionally to buzz words. Things like "pagan" and "jungle music" would set anyone off, so that you're more likely to get that kind of attitiude. A gut response set off several gut responses in return. Probably innocent enough on everoyone's part, but that's how we humanoids tend to process things.


excellent point!!!

[Cleombrotus]

Personally I like Left-wing angry young dudes. A guy named George Fox was one. Started the group I got saved in, too.


Well, when I see the angry young Leftists offering as their solution to the problems they whine about being faith in Christ and taking delight in the things of God, I'll get on board myself. Until then I consider their spirit to be one of scattering and not gathering. (Matt. 12:30)




Well I'll take your word for it until then, but for me I'm not so sure the whole issue is any deeper other than just people reacting emotionally to buzz words. Things like "pagan" and "jungle music" would set anyone off, so that you're more likely to get that kind of attitiude. A gut response set off several gut responses in return. Probably innocent enough on everoyone's part, but that's how we humanoids tend to process things.

I think it not as simple as that. We usually get defensive only when what we treasure is threatened. (Luke 12:34)

[Kevin Wayne]

Well, when I see the angry young Leftists offering as their solution to the problems they whine about being faith in Christ and taking delight in the things of God, I'll get on board myself. Until then I consider their spirit to be one of scattering and not gathering. (Matt. 12:30)



Well I would have to say that in Bono's case, his activism for things such as the Jubilee project takes care of that quite nicely- regardless of whether you agree with it or not. Also, in response to his challenge to the Christian community to address social issues, a CD was made to benefit AIDS in Africa.


Now that I think about it, were talking about somebody who's met and struck up a friendship with Jesse Helms! I think Mr. Bono is a lot more diplomatic than you give him credit for. You make him sound more like Sinead O’Connor before she mellowed (in her tear up the Pope's picture on TV days.) I actually don’t think the "angry young man" thing is fair



I think it not as simple as that. We usually get defensive only when what we treasure is threatened. (Luke 12:34)



So rather than just admit that someone ran their mouth off and typed before they thought, you would rather make this a psychological issue regarding why people were upset. It can't just be that they saw an injustice? Hmm... I dunno, I'd rather leave this as pretty much in God's hands to judge anyones "heart", and call it more or less a Romans 14 issue, than a Luke 12:34 issue.

[brother vinny]

I think it not as simple as that. We usually get defensive only when what we treasure is threatened. (Luke 12:34)

Amen. I treasure Bono as a brother in Christ.

[Pilgrim]

Well I would have to say that in Bono's case, his activism for things such as the Jubilee project takes care of that quite nicely- regardless of whether you agree with it or not. Also, in response to his challenge to the Christian community to address social issues, a CD was made to benefit AIDS in Africa.


Now that I think about it, were talking about somebody who's met and struck up a friendship with Jesse Helms! I think Mr. Bono is a lot more diplomatic than you give him credit for. You make him sound more like Sinead O’Connor before she mellowed (in her tear up the Pope's picture on TV days.) I actually don’t think the "angry young man" thing is fair







So rather than just admit that someone ran their mouth off and typed before they thought, you would rather make this a psychological issue regarding why people were upset. It can't just be that they saw an injustice? Hmm... I dunno, I'd rather leave this as pretty much in God's hands to judge anyones "heart", and call it more or less a Romans 14 issue, than a Luke 12:34 issue.
I actually don’t think the "angry young man" thing is fair

It is totally not a fiar one and spoken from ignorance really. It's pretty obvious that people are speaking of things they are not particularly well versed in and are more or less simply speaking from an aprior against all things pop.

[The Creep]

Bono is one of the few authentic prophets of our era. The reason why he is a leftist is because a Christian prophet is without honor in his own country. The stone the right wing has rejected has become a corner stone for a regenerated and relevant Christianity. Go, Bono, go!

[Cleombrotus]

Well I would have to say that in Bono's case, his activism for things such as the Jubilee project takes care of that quite nicely- regardless of whether you agree with it or not. Also, in response to his challenge to the Christian community to address social issues, a CD was made to benefit AIDS in Africa.


Now that I think about it, were talking about somebody who's met and struck up a friendship with Jesse Helms! I think Mr. Bono is a lot more diplomatic than you give him credit for. You make him sound more like Sinead O’Connor before she mellowed (in her tear up the Pope's picture on TV days.) I actually don’t think the "angry young man" thing is fair







So rather than just admit that someone ran their mouth off and typed before they thought, you would rather make this a psychological issue regarding why people were upset. It can't just be that they saw an injustice? Hmm... I dunno, I'd rather leave this as pretty much in God's hands to judge anyones "heart", and call it more or less a Romans 14 issue, than a Luke 12:34 issue.



OK, Kevin,

I'm gonna leave it here if you don't mind, ok? I'm not trying to avoid the issues you wish to raise but I did not intend to argue about Mr. Bono. It is not a matter of concern to me if you are a fan of him or any other rock musician. Well, at least, not on a surface level.

There are larger issues involved here that I want to get at and am having a difficult time deciding what needs to be addressed first to ensure that we are all on the same page. At this point it seems to me that we are all just talking past one another.

Some think the issue is music and musical types and they wish to argue about that; some think the issue is musical personalities and wish to argue about them. Some think it a combination of the two.

I am concerned with neither. I am concerned with their spirits. But how to get that across and be understood is the difficulty when speaking with those who do not seem to be familiar with the subject. I do not mean that as an insult.

Regards,
Cleombrotus

[Kevin Wayne]

I am concerned with neither. I am concerned with their spirits. But how to get that across and be understood is the difficulty when speaking with those who do not seem to be familiar with the subject. I do not mean that as an insult.

Regards,
Cleombrotus



I think I fairly grasp what you are trying to say which is to test the spirits to see if they are of God? Which is all fine and good- I just am arguing for a bit of context in understanding any one person's life. Espcially when they have shown a certain capacity to grow up.

[Cleombrotus]

I think I fairly grasp what you are trying to say which is to test the spirits to see if they are of God?

Exactly. Now we are getting somewhere.


Which is all fine and good- I just am arguing for a bit of context in understanding any one person's life. Espcially when they have shown a certain capacity to grow up.


I believe I have addressed that issue as regards Mr. Bono's apparent growth and have indicated that I am not competent to judge his life, at least until it is finished. And most likely, not even then.

That does not mean, however, that while one is still living, their lives, words, and actions are immune from valid criticisms.

[Amazing Rando]

Bono is one of the few authentic prophets of our era. The reason why he is a leftist is because a Christian prophet is without honor in his own country. The stone the right wing has rejected has become a corner stone for a regenerated and relevant Christianity. Go, Bono, go!

:lol:

[Pilgrim]

Exactly. Now we are getting somewhere.




I believe I have addressed that issue as regards Mr. Bono's apparent growth and have indicated that I am not competent to judge his life, at least until it is finished. And most likely, not even then.

That does not mean, however, that while one is still living, their lives, words, and actions are immune from valid criticisms.
You see, that's where I am baffled. No one has offered any valid criticisms. They other thing is the spirit of division that is offered. A man joyfully relates an encouter with our God inorthodox and beautiful terms and our first response is to tear down? That seems counter to the spirit of Phil. 2.

[Kevin Wayne]

I believe I have addressed that issue as regards Mr. Bono's apparent growth and have indicated that I am not competent to judge his life, at least until it is finished. And most likely, not even then.

That does not mean, however, that while one is still living, their lives, words, and actions are immune from valid criticisms.



And I don't think anyone is suggesting that this is the case. I think it's more of a situation of we're glad the kid passed his basic math exam & you are hand-wringing that he hasn't gotten into Calculus yet.

[eudyptes]

And I don't think anyone is suggesting that this is the case. I think it's more of a situation of we're glad the kid passed his basic math exam & you are hand-wringing that he hasn't gotten into Calculus yet.

Now what are you doing going and messing up a perfectly good thread with talk about Calculus...jeesh :penggrin:...sorry, back to the discussion.

Cleombrotus, (is it okay to shorten this to Cleo - I know one of these times I'll fat finger your name) -- In reading through the posts, I would agree with Kevin's take on what's been posted so far. (Still don't care much about the Calc analogy though...bad memories :smile:).

I do want to say I appreciate your sticking around to share your thoughts, usually these type of discussions fall apart rapidly and disovle into "you're wrong...no, you're wrong" posting wars. The tone of this thread has been pleasant, even as everyone tries to get a handle on where each other stands on the issue.

[Kevin Wayne]

I think I'd like to add that I can't speak for anyone here, but as far as my friends & I who have disccussed the issues for ages, we are being discerning, that's why we couldn't rightly swllow a lot of things U2 was quoted as saying regarding spiritual things! That could have been the clumsy way reporters tried to put words in people's mouths too. But yeah, when even those who are most likely to accept a person as a Christian in spite of their failings start sighing over someone's comments, you know there's a problem. Again, that could have largely been due to the way in which someone was quoted. But I don't think you can say we haven't been applying the "test all things" principle.

[Cleombrotus]

You see, that's where I am baffled. No one has offered any valid criticisms.

Thomas offered very valid criticisms, as did 7th Angel. Micah4's, while not technically a criticism, contained very valid points which those on the receiving end of your indignation could certainly have used in their defense, if they were so inclined. You may not agree with those criticisms, as you obviously do not, but they were valid.



They other thing is the spirit of division that is offered. A man joyfully relates an encouter with our God in orthodox and beautiful terms and our first response is to tear down? That seems counter to the spirit of Phil. 2.

Questioning the spirits is not contrary to sound judgement, Pilg. In fact, it is advised.

[Cleombrotus]

Now what are you doing going and messing up a perfectly good thread with talk about Calculus...jeesh :penggrin:...sorry, back to the discussion.

Cleombrotus, (is it okay to shorten this to Cleo - I know one of these times I'll fat finger your name) -- In reading through the posts, I would agree with Kevin's take on what's been posted so far. (Still don't care much about the Calc analogy though...bad memories :smile:).

I do want to say I appreciate your sticking around to share your thoughts, usually these type of discussions fall apart rapidly and disovle into "you're wrong...no, you're wrong" posting wars. The tone of this thread has been pleasant, even as everyone tries to get a handle on where each other stands on the issue.


Cleo is fine, eudyptes.

[Pilgrim]

No one has offered a valid criticism of Bono's words from the OP with the exception of Kevin and Ryo. Everything else has been based on opinions of rock and music or of Bono himself and most of that has been pretty ill informed at that.

[Cleombrotus]

And I don't think anyone is suggesting that this is the case. I think it's more of a situation of we're glad the kid passed his basic math exam & you are hand-wringing that he hasn't gotten into Calculus yet.


Kevin,

A few years ago I attended a Promise Keepers convention in Philadelphia. Something like 40,000 men, reportedly, were there; most of them middle age.
About the middle of the second day a young guy named Michael J. Smith came out onstage ( yes, onstage) with his guitar and, with the Promise Keepers band as backup, played some pieces from his most recent album (I guess) and them gave a short and theologically sound inspirational message to a good round of applause.

Everyone was highly impressed that a musician of his stature was there. (I had never heard of him at the time) I could only scratch my head and wonder what the qualifications, besides being a successful musician able to play guitar and write songs, were necessary to address 40,000 Christian men, many of whom had probably been Christians longer than he had been alive.

I was equally mystified that so many were agog and atwitter.

I have never attended another Promise Keepers convention.

[Cleombrotus]

No one has offered a valid criticism of Bono's words from the OP with the exception of Kevin and Ryo. Everything else has been based on opinions of rock and music or of Bono himself and most of that has been pretty ill informed at that.


Maybe his words aren't the issue?

[Cleombrotus]

Maybe his words aren't the issue?


No. I take that back. I just re-read the words of the OP. Thomas' criticism is exactly valid. I have real problems with his statement.

[eudyptes]

Kevin,

A few years ago I attended a Promise Keepers convention in Philadelphia. Something like 40,000 men, reportedly, were there; most of them middle age.
About the middle of the second day a young guy named Michael J. Smith came out onstage ( yes, onstage) with his guitar and, with the Promise Keepers band as backup, played some pieces from his most recent album (I guess) and them gave a short and theologically sound inspirational message to a good round of applause.

Everyone was highly impressed that a musician of his stature was there. (I had never heard of him at the time) I could only scratch my head and wonder what the qualifications, besides being a successful musician able to play guitar and write songs, were necessary to address 40,000 Christian men, many of whom had probably been Christians longer than he had been alive.

I was equally mystified that so many were agog and atwitter.

I have never attended another Promise Keepers convention.

I know this was addressed to Kevin, but I'd like to ask a question. If the message was theologically sound, why did his "stature" come into play? Or his age? I'm not sure I get the point you're trying to make here.
(And in reviewing the post, I guess I asked more than A question...)

[Kevin Wayne]

Kevin,

A few years ago I attended a Promise Keepers convention in Philadelphia. Something like 40,000 men, reportedly, were there; most of them middle age.
About the middle of the second day a young guy named Michael J. Smith came out onstage ( yes, onstage) with his guitar and, with the Promise Keepers band as backup, played some pieces from his most recent album (I guess) and them gave a short and theologically sound inspirational message to a good round of applause.

Everyone was highly impressed that a musician of his stature was there. (I had never heard of him at the time) I could only scratch my head and wonder what the qualifications, besides being a successful musician able to play guitar and write songs, were necessary to address 40,000 Christian men, many of whom had probably been Christians longer than he had been alive.

I was equally mystified that so many were agog and atwitter.

I have never attended another Promise Keepers convention.




Such is your elitism...



Man, this thread has gotten bo-ring...! Anyone wanna join me in reading some karl Barth?

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

I've enjoyed the snippets I've read from Barth. What shall we read next?

[Kevin Wayne]

I've enjoyed the snippets I've read from Barth. What shall we read next?


This is pretty good:


Secularization and Sanctification



A Study of Karl Barth's Doctrine of Sanctification

and Its Contextual Application to the Korean Church



http://jsrhee.hihome.com/dissintro.htm




I've read a couple of sections in Chapter 2 that interested me, and now i'm going to slowly try to digest the contents of Ch 3.

[Cleombrotus]

I know this was addressed to Kevin, but I'd like to ask a question. If the message was theologically sound, why did his "stature" come into play? Or his age? I'm not sure I get the point you're trying to make here.
(And in reviewing the post, I guess I asked more than A question...)


Yeah, they didn't get it either.

But the unsaved do. And they are not drawn.

[Cleombrotus]

Such is your elitism...



Man, this thread has gotten bo-ring...! Anyone wanna join me in reading some karl Barth?



Kevin, when's the last time you walked up to a total stranger and tried to talk to them about Jesus?

You want not boring, I suggest you try that.


See ya' later.
Cleo.

[Kevin Wayne]

Kevin, when's the last time you walked up to a total stranger and tried to talk to them about Jesus?

You want not boring, I suggest you try that.


See ya' later.
Cleo.



Thanks a bunch for your condescending attitude, I find it soooo... edifying and enlightening.


Ever think that you don't really know me? Or my background, or what I've done, learned, studied and accomplished?


Not that it matters to you, who prefer to want to remain in the place of "teacher" for the rest of us.


Anyway, I'm just some nut who posts on the internet and doesn't know as much as you. So don't mind me...




:ahem:

[Thomas2003]

Basically, if I read him right, what he is saying is, you can't get to the Spirit through the flesh.

I quite agree.

I wonder if Bono gets that.


Well, you are much more eloquent than I am.

[Cleombrotus]

Thanks a bunch for your condescending attitude, I find it soooo... edifying and enlightening.


Ever think that you don't really know me? Or my background, or what I've done, learned, studied and accomplished?


Not that it matters to you, who prefer to want to remain in the place of "teacher" for the rest of us.


Anyway, I'm just some nut who posts on the internet and doesn't know as much as you. So don't mind me...




:ahem:


"...and I will make boys their princes,
and babes shall rule over them.

"And the people will oppress one another,
every man his fellow
and every man his neighbor;

"The youth will be insolent to the elder,
and the base fellow to the honorable."

"My people - children are their oppressors,
and women rule over them.

"Oh my people, your leaders mislead you,
and confuse the course of your paths."


Isaiah 3: 4-5, 12


Probably doesn't apply, but it came to mind when I read your post.

I wonder what Barth's take on it was?

[Cleombrotus]

Well, you are much more eloquent than I am.


In order for there to be good poets; it is necessary for there to first be good audiences, Thomas.

Take care, and God bless.

[Thomas2003]

Hi Thomas. I want to be sure of what you are saying before I respond. Are you saying that "Jungle Music" is necessarily bad due it's use for (or roots in) idolatrous purposes in pagan cultures?


Music that is designed, or originates from, the purposes of being felt through the feet to stir up the sexual energies are a lot like alcohol. Used in moderation man can "enjoy it", too much and he takes his clothes off and dances around camp fires naked.

It is misuse of the gift.

[Thomas2003]

:poke: Music itself is completely morally neutral. It all depends on how its used. It's a medium. What matters is the message.

No, it's not neutral - everything that exists exists within a context, that context is not neutrality.

[Kevin Wayne]

"...and I will make boys their princes,
and babes shall rule over them.

"And the people will oppress one another,
every man his fellow
and every man his neighbor;

"The youth will be insolent to the elder,
and the base fellow to the honorable."

"My people - children are their oppressors,
and women rule over them.

"Oh my people, your leaders mislead you,
and confuse the course of your paths."


Isaiah 3: 4-5, 12


Probably doesn't apply, but it came to mind when I read your post.

I wonder what Barth's take on it was?




Feel free to study him for yourself and find out... as one who still remembers seeing the Beatles on Televsion, I find there's always new things I can learn. How 'bout yerself? :wink:

[Pilgrim]

I have learned that it is best to be like the Bereans; not like the Quakers.

And yet, somehow, you sound more like a pharisee than either of those. :shrug:

[brother vinny]

No, it's not neutral - everything that exists exists within a context, that context is not neutrality.

You sound like Bill Gothard.

IOW, legalist as all get out.

[Kevin Wayne]

No, it's not neutral - everything that exists exists within a context, that context is not neutrality.



You sound like Bill Gothard.

IOW, legalist as all get out.




And after all, the context of every human invention is "all have sinned", so who cares?


But I like Barth's notion that since Christ was slain before Earth was founded, that means God's intent for the creation is actually good. That means everything under the sun, in my estimation. ;-)

[Amazing Rando]

Since when was Christ slain before the world was founded? I coulda sworn he was slain in the AD 30's sometime

[john-philip]

Oops! I sorta forgot about this thread.

I would not be brave enough to venture any sort of objective measurable delimitations on what makes some organizations of sound and vibrations, rhythm or melody communicate immorality and what makes others communicate the opposite. But at the same time I think it would also be pretty bold to state with certainty that this is not the case with some forms.

All art- written word, visual art, music- communicates something of the mind of the artist. We're able to easily analyze and examine the written word- novels, essays, poems- and reason about it's contents, because that is the area of the brain that processes language. Musical forms are processed on a different level, but nevertheless they enter our mind and influence our thought patterns. I don't think it would be a reasonable critique to say of a magazine article or an essay, "how in the world can certain organizations of consonants and vowels be inherently moral or immoral?"- which seems to be what you've done to communication in the form of rhythm and melody. This is entirely overlooking the component of communication which is the essence of art. Written or spoken words, a painting on canvas, a collection of sounds; these are all forms of communication. At some level, the output reflects the inner thoughts of the artist generating the work; and at some level, that thought is communicated to us, and our minds at some level begin to reflect the patterns that are present in that communication when we are exposed to it. To flatly deny that music could be inherently moral or immoral would seem to me to be very near to denying that _any_ form of communication could be inherently moral or immoral. I'm not sure if you would go that far.

Now, despite all that, I wouldn't be so bold as to make a judgment call as to whether Bono's (or any other artist's) music is for good or for evil; but I don't think we can certainly conclude that musical forms are necessarily lacking a capacity to communicate a positive or negative message similar to the capacity which is present in other forms of communication, such as writing.

Micah, I'm not convinced I disagree with you. :smile:

In short, I'm not stating that music cannot be used for good or evil, I'm saying that the music per se (that is, the music, in and of itself, with nothing else considered) cannot be inherently good or evil.

In the example of language, I would argue that the written words in the magazine article are not inherently evil. Suppose some machine that generated random letters and words came up with the same content - did the machine write something evil? Suppose even more, that the article was read by someone who does not speak the language of the computer. Or, if you would humor me, imagine that the contents of the randomly generated article means one thing in one language and something else in another language. This would be entirely possible, AFAICS. Now, I'm certaintly not defending the article or it's writer. If it was written by human hands and done intentionally, it was sinful. But it wasn't the syllables and letters and words themselves that made it sinful - it was what the writer intended to communicate. I think we can take this analogy to music then - though applying it is a little more difficult, IMO.

Now, just for the sake of furthering my point with music - words and letters can certainly aid in expressing meaning. Like the words smooth and bumpy. Each of the letters in smooth can be elongated indefinitely (theoretically) without interuption ('ssss', 'mmmm', 'ooooo', 'thhhh') in how they function in the word, much like a smooth surface doesn't have interruptions. Contrasted with 'bumpy' which consists of hard constanants that 'interrupt' the flow of the word. However, it is entirely possible for a language to exist in which the word "smooth" means "full of bumps." In turn, even though music may aid certain idea, thought, desire etc., it is entirely possible for it to be used another fashion - it is not inherent (AFAICS.)

[john-philip]

Music that is designed, or originates from, the purposes of being felt through the feet to stir up the sexual energies are a lot like alcohol. Used in moderation man can "enjoy it", too much and he takes his clothes off and dances around camp fires naked.

It is misuse of the gift.

Oh yes, I just can't control the sexual energies I feel when I listen to African music. :ahem:

Seriously, what is your point here?

[john-philip]

No, it's not neutral - everything that exists exists within a context, that context is not neutrality.

I hope you're not listening to non-gregorian chants then. That leading tone in the major scale creates a lot of desire. Sounds like lust to me. You might even start listening to Bach in the nude. :ahem:

[brother vinny]

I hope you're not listening to non-gregorian chants then. That leading tone in the major scale creates a lot of desire. Sounds like lust to me. You might even start listening to Bach in the nude. :ahem:

So that's what they mean when they say, "Bach-naked."

[john-philip]

So that's what they mean when they say, "Bach-naked."
Booooo! :thumbd:




:wink:

[Cleombrotus]

And yet, somehow, you sound more like a pharisee than either of those. :shrug:

That's the risk one takes when speaking what he believes is the truth.

[Kevin Wayne]

That's the risk one takes when speaking what he believes is the truth.


Which a Pharisee will always pat themselves on the back for...