Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If being Christian is so great, why is the music so bad?
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 99 (7042)
03-16-2002 6:18 PM


I am interested in what Christians have to say about this.
Why is so much of Christian music so bland and pablum-like?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-16-2002 7:13 PM nator has replied
 Message 5 by joz, posted 03-17-2002 1:33 AM nator has not replied
 Message 6 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-17-2002 4:36 AM nator has replied
 Message 23 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 12:16 AM nator has replied
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 03-06-2004 5:15 PM nator has not replied
 Message 55 by Angeldust, posted 03-29-2004 9:54 PM nator has not replied
 Message 56 by secondlaw, posted 03-30-2004 3:55 PM nator has not replied
 Message 62 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 04-30-2004 4:22 PM nator has not replied
 Message 65 by contracycle, posted 07-19-2004 12:28 PM nator has not replied
 Message 83 by lfen, posted 09-06-2004 3:04 AM nator has not replied
 Message 85 by General Nazort, posted 09-18-2004 1:16 PM nator has not replied
 Message 87 by riVeRraT, posted 09-19-2004 12:45 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 3 of 99 (7058)
03-16-2002 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Minnemooseus
03-16-2002 7:13 PM


quote:
Originally posted by minnemooseus:
First of all, I suspect that contemporary Christian radio features few, if any African-American artists.
It's amazing that music supposedly having to do with the soul, can be so soul-less.

Right.
I was talking about white churches.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-16-2002 7:13 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 7 of 99 (7095)
03-17-2002 8:00 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Mister Pamboli
03-17-2002 4:36 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
[b]
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
I am interested in what Christians have to say about this.
Why is so much of Christian music so bland and pablum-like?

Because most music is bland.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that you and I listen to the same music.
[QUOTE]Christian music is no different from any other. Perhaps the question you should be asking is why does so little secular music reach the heights of the Saint Matthew Passsion, or Mozart's Requiem, or Haydn's Creation, or Handel's Messiah, or a Palestrina Mass, or a Gaelic Psalm, or a spiritual, or the heartbreaking tenderness of a carol, or (appropriate at this time of year) the Lent prose?[/B]
Except for the spirituals, all of the music you mention was created some time ago. Some of it, a very very long time ago. This is not what I am talking about. I am talking about contemporary Christian music, of any stripe, minus that to be found in the black churches.
I suppose that I am saying that very little great art has come out of contentedness. Art comes from pain and struggle and ecstacy and passion and huge emotions.
If Christians are so filled with joy, then why don't their songs sound like "Walkin' on Sunshine" by Katrina and the Waves?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-17-2002 4:36 AM Mister Pamboli has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-17-2002 4:14 PM nator has replied
 Message 10 by leekim, posted 03-20-2002 11:50 AM nator has not replied
 Message 36 by justdana, posted 08-24-2002 3:18 PM nator has not replied
 Message 37 by justdana, posted 08-24-2002 3:20 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 9 of 99 (7202)
03-18-2002 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Mister Pamboli
03-17-2002 4:14 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
[b]
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Except for the spirituals, all of the music you mention was created some time ago. Some of it, a very very long time ago. This is not what I am talking about. I am talking about contemporary Christian music, of any stripe, minus that to be found in the black churches.
quote:
O, I see. Sorry.
It's OK, I wasn't exactly clear.
[QUOTE]There is some great Christian music being written today - Taverner, Gorecki, MacMillan - but I suspect you mean the "popular" style? I have to agree then - most if it is drivel.[/B][/QUOTE]
Yep, I mean popular music. I mean, is Amy Grant all the better it gets? Why is that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-17-2002 4:14 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by justdana, posted 08-24-2002 3:22 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 13 of 99 (7470)
03-21-2002 7:56 AM


I think it should also be mentioned that a great many of the famous "classical" composers who wrote requiems and passions and other religious works were commissioned to do so by rich patrons. Many great European composers (and painters, for that matter) dealt with religious themes because that's where the money was.

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Philip, posted 03-22-2002 12:32 AM nator has not replied
 Message 16 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-22-2002 12:48 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 17 of 99 (7685)
03-23-2002 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Mister Pamboli
03-22-2002 12:48 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
[b] [QUOTE]Originally posted by schrafinator:
[b]I think it should also be mentioned that a great many of the famous "classical" composers who wrote requiems and passions and other religious works were commissioned to do so by rich patrons. Many great European composers (and painters, for that matter) dealt with religious themes because that's where the money was.
Hmmm don't like that argument. It's like saying Sagan, Dawkins, Gould et al were in it for the money and the fame.[/QUOTE]
I'm not speculating why people are "in it". I am saying that the direction their work took was sometimes dictated by what their patrons commissioned.
University scientists (once tenured) do not work on commissions and they explore what they wish, more or less. Look at John Mack.
Of course there was good money in it - but that doesn't mean there was not also great inspiration. The same applies today - there are very fine musicians indeed, and artists, who make fortunes, but their commitment to their art, as art, need not be lesser for it.
[/b][/QUOTE]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-22-2002 12:48 AM Mister Pamboli has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by jhmyself, posted 03-23-2002 4:37 PM nator has replied
 Message 42 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-14-2002 2:42 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 19 of 99 (7699)
03-24-2002 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by jhmyself
03-23-2002 4:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by jhmyself:
Getting back to the origional topic:
"Why is christian music so bad?"
Bah. If the only examples you've ever heard in your life for good christian music made recently is Amy Grant, you haven't heard good christian music made recently. Sadly, though, I've found that this kind of music is often hard to find, but it can be done. Check out www.RadioU.com, a station in columbus that plays alternative christian music. I think there's some great songs on MP3.com from groups such as the O.C. Supertones, Knowdaverbs, Cross Movement, and Out Of Eden.

Thanks, jh, I'll check it out.
Still, the greater question remains; if being a Christian is so wonderful, why is it so difficult to find good Christian music?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by jhmyself, posted 03-23-2002 4:37 PM jhmyself has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-24-2002 1:57 PM nator has not replied
 Message 50 by Trump won, posted 03-07-2004 10:36 PM nator has not replied
 Message 51 by BUBBA, posted 03-11-2004 8:52 AM nator has not replied
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 09-19-2004 12:28 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 24 of 99 (14104)
07-25-2002 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Jonathan
07-25-2002 12:16 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Jonathan:
Evolutionist music to too great either. Did you see the post "living in an Amish (creationist) paradise"?
Ill take Christian music anyday.

What, pray tell, do you consider "Evolutionist music??"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 12:16 AM Jonathan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by John, posted 07-25-2002 9:11 AM nator has not replied
 Message 26 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 11:33 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 27 of 99 (14156)
07-25-2002 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Jonathan
07-25-2002 12:16 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Jonathan:
Evolutionist music to too great either. Did you see the post "living in an Amish (creationist) paradise"?
Ill take Christian music anyday.

Um, riiiight.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 12:16 AM Jonathan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 9:31 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 29 of 99 (14202)
07-26-2002 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Jonathan
07-25-2002 9:31 PM


Say, Jonathan, howsabout that thread dealing with reproductive advantage that you abandoned?
There are lots of questions and comments waiting for you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Jonathan, posted 07-25-2002 9:31 PM Jonathan has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 39 of 99 (16237)
08-29-2002 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by justdana
08-24-2002 3:22 PM


quote:
Originally posted by justdana:
May I please assume that you're not looking to listen to Christian music on a day-to-day basis? I consider Nichole Nordeman very creative aside from a Stevie Wonder remake, but who doesn't remake songs? I think you might be pleased with her music, but I only said "might". I don't know your taste in music... Other creative songwriters/musicians, to me: Cindy Morgan, Chris Rice and Dc Talk.
You would be correct that I do not listen to christian music on a day to day basis.
Then again, I do not listen to popular music at all on a day to day basis.
I find it bland and boring and corporate. Since the Christian music that I have heard tends to be trying hard to be inoffensive and "nice", I find it boring. I don't think "nice" is always bad, but I don't think every painting in the museum should be of verdant fields and vases of flowers, either. Art isn't always "nice."
Some favorites (and I will date myself, I'm sure):
Ani DiFranco
Gypsy Kings
The Police
Nirvana
Dar Williams
Peter Gabriel
Miles Davis
Django Reinhart
The Pixies
Shawn Colvin
Hun Hur Tu
Kate Bush

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by justdana, posted 08-24-2002 3:22 PM justdana has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Philip, posted 09-13-2002 2:46 AM nator has not replied
 Message 45 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-20-2002 1:09 AM nator has not replied
 Message 93 by riVeRraT, posted 09-19-2004 1:16 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 79 of 99 (127788)
07-26-2004 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Gup20
07-26-2004 11:18 AM


quote:
I was not aware that the writers of the constitution were primarily Icelandic, or pagan. In fact, they were Christians.
Actually, many of the the Founding Fathers were Deists.
The idea that our government is Christian in nature is silly. It is based more upon the ideals of the Enlightenment, which are secular, humanist values.
quote:
Well a whole bunch of Christians started the USA,
Nope, not true, as stated above.
Jefferson, Paine, and Adams, were definitely not Christian.
Read more here:
Quartz Hill School of Theology
quote:
which is the most free nation on earth. You should probably rethink that statement. Now the church of england was dictatorieal and restrictive not because they had political power, but because they were corrupt. They were more concerned with keeping their political power than they were with keeping the Word of God.
...and how is that any different from what religious power does in any other theocracy?
You seem to forget that the reason the US is "the most free nation on earth" is precisely because it's government is purely secular, with the foundres specifically leaving the matter of religion to the individual.
quote:
Although it has been trashed, our religous freedom was meant to make sure that people were never told what they could and couldn't believe... and that is definately consistent with the Bible.
Excuse me?
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
That is the first commandment. How is this consistent with religious freedom?
Oh, and how are your religious rights being trashed?
quote:
Therein lies the founding father's reason for religous freedom. With a dictatorial church, people were not free to choose Christ... they were made to choose christ because there was no choice. That is not freedom. Our founders realized that and knew that the Bible didn't teach that.
This is so wrong.
The Founders understood that religion and faith were a private matter and that it was intrusive for a Government to have an official religion.
They were not following the Bible, nor were they hoping that people would "chooses Christ".
They were following a secular model of government.
quote:
Secondly, Biblical creation had been around for thousands of years before Darwin.
And Hindu creation myths, Native American creation myths, and the Epic of Gilgamesh had been around a lot longer than Biblical Creation.
What, did you think that the bible was the oldest religious text or something?
Take a basic world religion class at the local community college or university. you will learn a lot that you don't know.
quote:
So technically, it was Darwin who 'changed' the version of history from creation to evolution.
Yes, and it was other scientists who "changed" the version of history from demons causing "posessions" to brain damage and disease causing mental illness.
Feel free to continue to live in the demon-haunted, ignorant Dark Ages if you like. The rest of us prefer modern medicine and reason over superstition, thank you.
I'll put my lot in with the people with the compass. You can stay with the people reading the chicken entrails to scry the future if that's what makes you most comfortable.
quote:
Why did he do this? Because his daughter died of a disease and he got pissed off at God for it and decided that a loving God couldn't have let his daughter die.
I'm sorry, but this is just stupid.
Um, Darwin began developing the ToE long before he was even married, let alone a father, long before his daugher's death.
The Theory of Evolution is is supported by an overwhelming amount of evidence from diverse scientific fields.
quote:
What Darwin failed to realize is that we live in a fallen sinful world marred by death, ruled by Satan.
Can you please explain to me what "sin" and "satan" have to do with the change in alelle frequencies in a population over time?
What you don't know about Biology is a lot.
quote:
Evolution tells you that the Bible is a lie... that it is a fairy tale.
No, evolution tells us that alelle frequencies change in populations over time.
YOU have decided that the Bible is a science textbook instead of a spiritual guide. Don't blame reason and science for your religious folly.
quote:
However, we have seen many creation sciences take hold and stand the test of time. For example, Isaac Newton was a Creationist. So was Louis Pasteur, Carlous Linneaus, and many more.
1) None of these people used "Godidit" in their work. They used methodological naturalism in their work, just like modern scientists.
2) None of them were alive when the Theory of Evolution was developed, nor had modern Geology discovered the Earth's ancient age.
quote:
These are men who's christianity and passion for the Bible drove them to their discoveries.
Bull. They used methodological naturalism, just like any science.
quote:
While not as popular as evolution science today, creation science can still show how a 6000 year old earth is possible.
Really? Please explain.
quote:
Many modern ideas, for example, have come from YEC views and have been adapted to fit with evolution and an old earth. For example, the Bible says that during the creation of the world, all the water was gathered together in one place (inferring all the land was in one place in one great continent). Long before the idea of continental drift entered the mind of evolutionists, it was part of the YEC creationist position.
First of all continental drift has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution. It is a Geologic theory, not one of Biology.
Second, YOUNG Earth Creationism rejects continental drift.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Gup20, posted 07-26-2004 11:18 AM Gup20 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by lfen, posted 09-06-2004 3:19 AM nator has not replied
 Message 88 by riVeRraT, posted 09-19-2004 12:53 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024