Bono & The Incarnation

[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...

[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...

"...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]

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?

[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.

[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.

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.

Seriously, what is your point here?