Christian prog vs secular prog

I think this rancorous discussion regarding Luther and the Papacy would be better for a religious forum somewhere, it seems to me. Isn't the topic "Christian prog vs secular prog," not "Catholism vs Protestantism"? This is the sort of thing that certainly fuels the fires of those outside the faith from ever wanting to go beyond the bickering to discover that this is NOT who Jesus is. Of course, in a way, this is also exactly what Sola Scriptura is about, the idea that much of what had become part and parcel of the Catholic Church was not Biblically based.

As to the artistic merits of Neal M's "Sola Scriptura," I find it very good musically, but am not as interested in it lyrically, as his other works.

How about that Cryptic Vision?

...and the Pope STILL says all us non- catholics (including the likes of Billy Graham) are going straight to Hell for no other reason than not being catholic. Luther wasn't infalible and neither is the Pope. Luther's views of Jews were not so terribly different from those of the Papacy at the time.

Luther's real contradiction and the crux of Sola Scriptura is this: Luther's theology challenged the authority of the papacy by holding that the Bible is the sole source of religious authority and that all baptized Christians are a priesthood of believers. According to Luther, salvation was attainable only by faith in Jesus as the Messiah, a faith unmediated by the church. These ideas helped to inspire the Protestant Reformation and change the course of Western civilization. Luther objected to a saying attributed to Johann Tetzel that "As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs, insisting that, since forgiveness was God's alone to grant, those who claimed that indulgences absolved buyers from all punishments and granted them salvation were in error. Christians, he said, must not slacken in following Christ on account of such false assurances. This, and the Papacy's relentless persecution of Luther and his followers (the 30 Years War killed more than 1/3 of the population of Germany and was a war waged by the Church against the followers of Luther).

THIS and only THIS is what Sola Scriptura are about. Luther's views on Jews are not part of the story and why you bring them in here when the Papacy's views on Jews at that time were more or less the same confuses me. If you had asked the Pope the same question on the same day Luther wrote his statements, the odds are you'd have gotten an almost identical answer. The Jews killed the Christ and this is something that they were still being held vehemently responsible for in those days.

As for making the comparison between Hitler and Luther it is completely ridiculous. Luther spent decades advocating kindness and tolerance toward the Jews in an effort to convert them (Judenmission I believe was his term for it which was sanctioned by Pope LEO X.) This was the only reason within Church doctrine for tolerance toward Jews; CONVERSION. The book you so gleefully quote from was written late in his life and reflected his feeling of failure in the effort to convert Jews to Christianity. He did not write more about Jews than Hitler did and there is a WORLD of difference between Luther's belief in salvation, which depended on a faith in Jesus as the Messiah — a belief Luther criticized the Jews for rejecting — and the Nazis' ideology of racial anti-semitism.

Your attack on Luther for Anti-Semitism reeks of "the pot calling the kettle black" Ivan.    Here are just a few examples of Papal anti-semitism through the years.

Pope Clement VIII: “The Bible itself says that the Jews are an accursed people.”

Pope Innocent III: “When Jews are admitted out of pity into familiar intercourse with Christians, they repay their hosts, according to the popular proverb, after the fashion of the rat hidden in the sack, or the snake in the bosom, or of the burning brand in one’s lap.”

Pope Gregory IX: “Ungrateful for favours and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness.” (Epistle to the Hierarchy of Germany)

Pope Stephen III: “With great sorrow and mortal anxiety, We have heard that the Jews have in a Christian land the same rights as Christians, that Christian men and women live under the same roof with these traitors and defile their souls day and night with blasphemies.” (Epistle to the Bishop of Norbonne)

Pope Innocent IV: “The wicked perfidy of the Jews - from whose hearts Our Saviour did not remove the veil because of their enormous crimes but caused them justly to continue in their blindness, commit acts of shame which engender astonishment in those who hear, and terror in those who discover it.” (The Wicked Perfidy of the Jews)

Pope Saint Gregory the Great: “Furthermore, I must tell you that I have been led to praise God the more for your work by what I have learnt from the report of my most beloved son Probinus the presbyter; namely that, your Excellency having issued a certain ordinance against the perfidy of the Jews, those to whom it related attempted to bend the rectitude of your mind by offering a sum of money; which your Excellency scorned, and, seeking to satisfy the judgment of Almighty God, preferred innocence to gold.” (Epistle to Rechared, King of the Visigoths)

Pope Saint Gregory VII: “We exhort your Royal Majesty [King Alfonse VI of Castile], not to further tolerate, that the Jews rule Christians and have power over them. For to allow that Christians are subordinated to Jews and are delivered to their whims, means to oppress the Church of God, means to revile Christ himself.” (Regesta IX. 2)

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “They shall not appear in public at all on the days of lamentation and on passion Sunday; because some of them on such days, as we have heard, do not blush to parade in very ornate dress and are not afraid to mock Christians who are presenting a memorial of the most sacred passion and are displaying signs of grief. What we most strictly forbid however, is that they dare in any way to break out in derision of the Redeemer.”

Pope Gregory IX: “We order all our brother bishops absolutely to suppress the blasphemy of Jews in your dioceses, churches, and communities, so that they do not dare raise their necks, bent under eternal slavery, to revile the Redeemer.”

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “We therefore renew in this canon, on account of the boldness of the offenders, what the Council of Toledo providently decreed in this matter: we forbid Jews to be appointed to public offices, since under cover of them they are very hostile to Christians.”

Pope Saint Gregory I: “It has come to my ears that certain men of perverse spirit have sown among you some things that are wrong and opposed to the holy faith, so as to forbid any work being done on the Sabbath day. What else can I call these but preachers of Antichrist, who, when he comes, will cause the Sabbath day as well as the Lord’s day to be kept free from all work. For, because he pretends to die and rise again, he wishes the Lord’s day to be had in reverence; and, because he compels the people to judaize that he may bring back the outward rite of the law, and subject the perfidy of the Jews to himself, he wishes the Sabbath to be observed.” (Epistles, Book XIII:1)


That the Jews are cursed to be unscrupulous moneygrubbers, like Judas

“Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests, and said to them: What will you give me, and I will betray him unto you? And they appointed him thirty pieces of silver. And from thenceforth he sought opportunity to betray him.” (Saint Matthew 26)

Pope Saint Pius V: “Besides usury, through which Jews everywhere have sucked dry the property of impoverished Christians, they are accomplices of thieves and robbers.” (Hebraeorum Gens)

Pope Benedict XIV: “Furthermore, by means of their particular practice of commerce, they amass a great store of money and then by an exorbitant rate of interest utterly destroy the wealth and inheritance of Christians.” (A Quo Primum)

Pope Clement VIII: “All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty, especially the farmers, working class people and the very poor. […] Their ethical and moral doctrines as well as their deeds rightly deserve to be exposed to criticism in whatever country they happen to live.”

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “The more the Christian religion is restrained from usurious practices, so much the more does the perfidy of the Jews grow in these matters, so that within a short time they are exhausting the resources of the Christians. Wishing therefore to see that Christians are not savagely oppressed by Jews in this matter, we ordain by this synodal decree that if Jews in the future, on any pretext, extort oppressive and excessive interest from Christians, then they are to be removed from contact with Christians until they have made adequate satisfaction for the immoderate burden. Christians too, if need be, shall be compelled by ecclesiastical censure, without the possibility of an appeal, to abstain from commerce with them. We enjoin upon princes, not to be hostile to Christians on this account, but rather to be zealous in restraining Jews from so great oppression.”


The Jews are cursed to be outcasts like Cain, segregated from the rest of the society within which they live

“And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and slew him. […] And he said to him: What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth to me from the earth. Now, therefore, cursed shalt thou be upon the earth, which hath opened her mouth and received the blood of thy brother at thy hand. When thou shalt till it, it shall not yield to thee its fruit: a fugitive and vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Innocent III: “The Lord made Cain a wanderer and a fugitive over the earth, but set a mark upon him, making his head to shake, lest anyone finding him should slay him. Thus the Jews, against whom the blood of Christ calls out, although they ought not to be wiped out, nevertheless, as wanderers they must remain upon the earth until their faces are filled with shame and they seek the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Epistle to the Count of Nevers)

Pope Saint Sylvester I at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea: “Concerning the prohibition of usury and base gain by the clergy; and concerning the prohibition against conversing or eating with the Jews. No priest shall set money out at interest or take unfair profit or be friendly or sociable with Jews; nor should anyone take food or drink with the Jews; for if this was decreed by the holy apostles, it is incumbent upon the faithful to obey their command; and the synod shall excommunicate any one who does not comply with this order.”

Pope Eugene IV: “We decree and order that from now on, and for all time, Christians shall not eat or drink with the Jews, nor admit them to feasts, nor cohabit with them, nor bathe with them. […] They cannot live among Christians, but in a certain street, separated and segregated from Christians, and outside which they cannot under any pretext have houses.”

Pope Alexander III: “Our ways of life and those of the Jews are utterly different, and Jews will easily pervert the souls of simple folk to their superstition and unbelief if such folk are living in continual and intimate intercourse with them.” (Ad Haec)


That the Jews are cursed to be distinguished from everyone else by an identifying mark, like Cain

“And the Lord set a mark upon Cain.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Martin V: “However, we received a short time ago through credible reports knowledge to our great alarm, that various Jews of both sexes in Cafas and other cities, lands and places overseas, which fall under the jurisdiction of Christians, are of obstinate mind and, in order to conceal swindling and wickedness, wear no special sign on their clothing, so that they are not recognisable as Jews. They are not ashamed to give themselves out as Christians before many Christians of both sexes of these cities, districts and places mentioned, who could not in fact identify them, and consequently commit shameful things and crimes.” (Sedes Apostolica)

Pope Eugene IV: “We decree and order that from now on, and for all time […] All and every single Jew, of whatever sex and age, must everywhere wear the distinctive dress and known marks by which they can be evidently distinguished from Christians.”

Pope Saint Pius V: “In order to make an end of all doubt concerning the colour of the cap and the sign of the women, we declare that the colour must be yellow.” (Romanus Pontifex)


That the Jews are cursed to be outcasts, periodically ejected from the nations amongst whom they live, like Cain

“A fugitive and vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Saint Pius V: “With full understanding and in exercising of the apostolic powers, we withdraw from the Jews and their rule (and recognize no right or claim) all properties, which the Jews have in their possession in this city Rome or other places of our domain of rule.” (Cum Nos Super)

Pope Paul IV: “It is too absurd and pointless that the Jews, whom their own guilt condemns to slavery, under the pretence that Christian piety suffers and tolerates their coexistence, pay back [with wickedness] the mercy received from Christians.” (Cum Nimis Absurdum)

Pope Leo VII: “Let the Gospel be preached unto them and, if they remain obstinate, let them be expelled.”

Pope Adrian I at the Second Ecumenical Council of Nicea: “Since certain, erring in the superstitions of the Hebrews, have thought to mock at Christ our God, and feigning to be converted to the religion of Christ do deny him, and in private and secretly keep the Sabbath and observe other Jewish customs, we decree that such persons be not received to communion, nor to prayers, nor into the Church; but let them be openly Hebrew according to their religion, and let them not bring their children to baptism, nor purchase or possess a slave.”

Pope Innocent IV: “We who long with all our hearts for the salvation of souls, grant you full authority by these present letters to banish the Jews, either in your own person or through the agency of others, especially since, as we have been informed, they do not abide by the regulations drawn up for them by this Holy See.” (To the King of France)

Pope Saint Pius V: “The Jewish people fell from the heights because of their faithlessness and condemned their Redeemer to a shameful death. Their godlessness has assumed such forms that, for the salvation of our own people, it becomes necessary to prevent their disease. Besides usury, through which Jews everywhere have sucked dry the property of impoverished Christians, they are accomplices of thieves and robbers; and the most damaging aspect of the matter is that they allure the unsuspecting through magical incantations, superstition, and witchcraft to the Synagogue of Satan and boast of being able to predict the future. We have carefully investigated how this revolting sect abuses the name of Christ and how harmful they are to those whose life is threatened by their deceit. On account of these and other serious matters, and because of the gravity of their crimes which increase day to day more and more, We order that, within 90 days, all Jews in our entire earthly realm of justice - in all towns, districts, and places - must depart these regions. After this time limit shall all at the present or in the future, who dwell or wander into that city or other already mentioned, be affected, their property confiscated and handed over to the Siscus, and they shall becomes slaves of the Roman Church, live in perpetual servitude and the Roman Church shall have the same rights over them as the remaining [worldly] lords over slaves and property.” (Hebraeorum Gens)

Christians agreed with the Church and the Jews were expelled in the following instances.

1. 250: Carthage;

2. 415: Alexandria;

3. 554: Diocese of Clement (France);

4. 561: Diocese of Uzzes (France);

5. 612: Visigoth Spain;

6. 642: Visigoth Empire;

7. 855: Italy;

8. 876: Sens;

9. 1012: Mayence;

10. 1181: France;

11. 1290: England;

12. 1306: France;

13. 1348: Switzerland;

14. 1349: Hielbronn (Germany);

15. 1349: Hungary;

16. 1388: Strasbourg;

17. 1394: Germany;

18. 1394: France;

19. 1422: Austria;

20. 1424: Fribourg & Zurich;

21. 1426: Cologne;

22. 1432: Savory;

23. 1438: Mainz;

24. 1439: Augsburg;

25. 1446: Bavaria;

26. 1453: Franconis;

27. 1453: Breslau;

28. 1454: Wurzburg;

29. 1485: Vincenza (Italy);

30. 1492: Spain;

31. 1495: Lithuania;

32. 1497: Portugal;

33. 1499: Germany;

34. 1514: Strasbourg;

35. 1519: Regensburg;

36. 1540: Naples;

37. 1542: Bohemia;

38. 1550: Genoa;

39. 1551: Bavaria;

40. 1555: Pesaro;

41. 1559: Austria;

42. 1561: Prague;

43. 1567: Wurzburg;

44. 1569: Papal States;

45. 1571: Brandenburg;

46. 1582: Netherlands;

47. 1593: Brandenburg, Austria;

48. 1597: Cremona, Pavia & Lodi;

49. 1614: Frankfort;

50. 1615: Worms;

51. 1619: Kiev;

52. 1649: Ukraine;

53. 1654: Little Russia;

54. 1656: Lithuania;

55. 1669: Oran (North Africa);

56. 1670: Vienna;

57. 1712: Sandomir;

58. 1727: Russia;

59. 1738: Wurtemburg;

60. 1740: Little Russia;

61. 1744: Bohemia;

62. 1744: Livonia;

63. 1745: Moravia;

64. 1753: Kovad (Lithuania);

65. 1761: Bordeaux;

66. 1772: Jews deported to the Pale of Settlement (Russia);

67. 1775: Warsaw;

68. 1789: Alace;

69. 1804: Villages in Russia;

70. 1808: Villages & Countrysides (Russia);

71. 1815: Lubeck & Bremen;

72. 1815: Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria;

73. 1820: Bremes;

74. 1843: Russian Border, Austria & Prussia;

75. 1862: Area in the U. S. under Grant's Jurisdiction;

76. 1866: Galatz, Romania;

77. 1919: Bavaria (foreign born Jews);

78. 1938-45: Nazi Controlled Areas;

79. 1948: Arab Countries.


That the Jews are cursed to be slaves like Esau

“And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy womb; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder [Esau] shall serve the younger [Isaac].” (Genesis 25)

“But he [Esau] who was of the bondwoman, was born according to the flesh: but he [Isaac] of the free woman, was by promise. Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments. The one from mount Sina, engendering unto bondage; which is Agar: For Sina is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.” (Galatians 4)

Pope Innocent III: “The Jews, by their own guilt, are consigned to perpetual servitude because they crucified the Lord.” (To the Archbishops of Sens and Paris)

Pope Innocent IV: “And that you [King Saint Louis IX] order both the aforesaid abusive books [The Talmud] condemned by the same doctors and generally all the books with their glosses which were examined and condemned by them to be burned by fire wherever they can be found throughout your entire kingdom, strictly forbidding that Jews henceforth have Christian nurses or servants, that the sons of a free woman may not serve the sons of a bondwoman, but as slaves condemned by the Lord, whose death they wickedly plotted, they at least outwardly recognize themselves as slaves of those whom the death of Christ made free and themselves slaves. So we may commend the zeal of your sincerity in the Lord with due praises.” (The Wicked Perfidy of the Jews)

Pope Saint Martin I: “If anyone shall teach a slave, under pretext of piety, to despise his master and to run away from his service, and not to serve his own master with good-will and all honour, let him be anathema.”

Pope Benedict XIV: “It is fitting for Jews to serve Christians, but not for Christians to serve Jews. On the contrary, the Jews, as slaves rejected by that Saviour Whose death they wickedly contrived, should recognize themselves in fact and in creed the slaves of those whom the death of Christ has set free, even as it has rendered them bondmen.” (Quoting Pope Innocent III, “Etsi Judaeos”)

Pope Gregory IX: “They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future become insolent, but that they always suffer publicly the shame of their sin in servile fear.” (Epistle to the Hierarchy of Germany)

Pope Alexander III at the Third Lateran Ecumenical Council: “We declare that the evidence of Christians is to be accepted against Jews in every case, since Jews employ their own witnesses against Christians - and that those who prefer Jews to Christians in this matter are to lie under anathema, since Jews ought to be slaves to Christians.” (Canon 26)



All this aside, I ask you Ivan, How are Luther's views toward the Jews (similar as they were to the Pope's own views) a central feature of Sola Scriptura, and what if any historical inaaccuracies in the Lyrics of Sola do you find?   You don't like Sola because you feel that it unfairly attacks your faith, I understand that, but how is it inaccurate and how are Luther's views of Jews involved when they were exactly the same views as those of the Pope (LEO X) that excommunicated him for opposing the practice of selling indulgences? Your points here make no sense in either the theological or the historical context. You just sound mad and insulted and I can't see why.   The story is true (embarrassing, but true) and it happened 491 years ago (plus or minus). I can't figure out how you claim the right to indignance here.


Edited by Trademark - February 10 2008 at 15:42

Garion81 wrote:    I am just trying to relate that it is a concept not debate its merits or lack of) is about the Martin Luther  thesis and the protestant split.  SO the that all of these things are religious in nature of course the lyrics probably sound heavy handed.

_____________________________

 

 

Accordingly, it must and dare not be considered a trifling matter but a most serious one to seek counsel against this and to save our souls from the Jews, that is, from the devil and from eternal death. My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire...
Second, that all their books -- their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible -- be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted...
Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country...
Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it...

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - February 10 2008 at 13:14

I did not mean to suggest it to be a condition of youth, but rather simply stated that for me, I passed from unbelief to belief; a tiny incapsulation of my own testimony.

In regards to associating atheism with postmodernism, you misread me. I didn't necessarily even begin with thoughts of addressing atheism, but just unbelief or aversion to belief.

You might find "One" to be less offensive to you, though he does include some praise to Jesus songs on the second disk. Mostly, though, "One" is a retelling of creation, fall, separation and reconcilliation. It is told in third person.

So yes, I understand that unbelief in its various forms, including atheism, is not a product of youth. Yes, many do not change their viewpoint with age. Statistically, it is less likely for someone to come to believe in God once they have passed through adolescence.  Despite the statistics, many do still convert to belief after the teen years, Morse and Livgren being just 2 who are germane to our discussion.

And last he didn't.  

kiwi wrote: Garion81 wrote: artguyken wrote: [QUOTE=EnglishAssassin] [QUOTE=artguyken] ...   On the other side of the fence I actually am not offended by Greg Lakes early lyrics. He is just a man searching no more or less than I for the truth.  At that time his outlook was very bleak towards God or religion but he certainly was not alone.  I think he had a bit of a change of heart at least towards tolerance by the time Closer to Believing came out in 1977.  As for Pulling Jesus from a hat the song was about a sinister showman (TV was my thought)  along the lines of Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury.  The people running the show are evil so pulling Jesus from hat would fit into that.  Never bothered me.    Bottom line for me is good music is good music no matter what the point of view of the artist writting it is.     I have wondered about this. I listened to ELP when I was an athiest "Can you believe God makes you breathe?" It seems that lots of middle class Western young men go through an athiestic phase - at least they are questioning. Did Greg Lake move through this phase and express different sentiments in his later lyrics? A lot of people are also turned off by the excesses of organised religion, such as Pink Floyd "Far away across the field, the tolling of the irion bell, calls the faithful to their knees to hear the soflty spoken magic spell".

kiwi wrote: artguyken wrote: No, not sanitized, but rather lyrical content written from a Christian perspective. They often write about themes or issues of faith, some more metaphorically than others. As mentioned, Neal Morse, post Spock's Beard is a prime example. The message is Christian. The music is prog. Of course, then this brings us back to the question of where else is music classified by its lyrical content? Should it or shouldn't it be?! I think it is very difficult to separate music from lyrics. There is usually congruity between the song and their lyrics. I prefer lyrics that are uplifting and I find the music behind uplifting lyrics typically has a positive vibe. If we consider the themes that tend to emerge in music we have a lot of love songs, we have protest/social commentary songs (e.g. get 'em out by friday). The blues often focuses on love and betrayal. Its refreshing to see less common themes. I am a Baha'i, not a Christian, but I believe in God and I am happy to hear anything that celebrates our creation and humanity. Ultimately there is a lot of choice and if you don't like it, you don't have to listen to it.

Yes, I'm right there with you in terms of I'd much rather be uplifted than dragged down by what I listen to. (I appreciate these instructions from the Apostle Paul to the Philipians: "Fix your thoughts on what is true, and honorable, and right, and pure, and lovely, and admirable. Think about things that are excellent and worthy of praise.")

Garion81 wrote: artguyken wrote: [QUOTE=EnglishAssassin] [QUOTE=artguyken] ...   On the other side of the fence I actually am not offended by Greg Lakes early lyrics. He is just a man searching no more or less than I for the truth.  At that time his outlook was very bleak towards God or religion but he certainly was not alone.  I think he had a bit of a change of heart at least towards tolerance by the time Closer to Believing came out in 1977.  As for Pulling Jesus from a hat the song was about a sinister showman (TV was my thought)  along the lines of Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury.  The people running the show are evil so pulling Jesus from hat would fit into that.  Never bothered me.    Bottom line for me is good music is good music no matter what the point of view of the artist writting it is.

I have wondered about this. I listened to ELP when I was an athiest "Can you believe God makes you breathe?" It seems that lots of middle class Western young men go through an athiestic phase - at least they are questioning. Did Greg Lake move through this phase and express different sentiments in his later lyrics?

A lot of people are also turned off by the excesses of organised religion, such as Pink Floyd "Far away across the field, the tolling of the irion bell, calls the faithful to their knees to hear the soflty spoken magic spell".

artguyken wrote: EnglishAssassin wrote: artguyken wrote: OK... I'm a bit baffled. For those who scorn the idea of Christian Prog or think it's laughable, I have to ask why? If there is no truth and all ideas are equal, then what difference does it make if someone wants to sing about their religious beliefs? Where's the tolerance of ideas? You shouldn't act so surprised.  Just as some of the Christians commenting in this thread have suggested they find free-thinking or anti-religious lyrics difficult to accept, it can be equally off-putting from the other perspective.  I don't, speaking as an atheist, object in the least to the occasional Christian theme cropping up in Dream Theater's lyrics, but I find Neal Morse's endless proselytising quite thoroughly unpalatable in a way that wholly puts me off listening to his music. As an aside, I'm slightly perplexed by the suggestion that the non-religious should be expected to believe that "there is no truth and all ideas are equal". No, not surprised -- and I understand what you're saying. It's an issue of world view. The prevailing post-modernist thought is generally the idea that truth is what you make it, that there is no absolute truth (in response to your last perplexity). My musing was in response to the idea that all ideas are equal, which many people profess over here. I understand that for you, Neal's lyrics are off putting. Certainly "Testimony" is very direct in its proclamations, but then the title describes it perfectly; it is his testimony of what his life was like, the despair that he felt and the joy and freedom that he experienced in accepting Jesus as Messiah. For someone who finds that idea repugnant, I can understand that it would grate. My questions are more for those who claim to be completely open minded or simply don't believe that lyrical content is particularly important. ("One" is much less direct, though it is a retelling of creation, fall, despair and reconciliation.) Musicians sing about what is important to them, some more metaphorically than others. Neither Kansas or Proto-Kaw are "Christian" bands, but "Somewhere to Elsewhere" by Kansas, and "Before Became After" and "The Wait of Glory" are penned by Kerry Livgren, who is a follower of Jesus. Having been involved in Livgren & Proto-Kaw discussion groups that are comprised of a great variety of belief matrices, his writing seems to be embraced, pre & post conversion, by those professing faith and those in the groups who do not. There is a greater subtlety in his writing than in Neal's. The spectrum of how "in your face" people's beliefs are presented is as broad within the CProg arena as they are for just general prog. And, as you alluded, if there was an Atheist Prog association, I'd generally not be interested. Generally, because as a person of faith, it wouldn't appeal to me, though there might be bands that still had some interesting things to say. Which brings me back to what I really was trying to say in my earlier posts and that's to not write off the bands/artists who are in the CProg camp because you think it's going to all be Praise Jesus music. It's not. And as I said earlier, labels can be helpful, but can also be detrimental. I'd rather just judge a band individually by their music and lyrics whether or not they appeal. As a reviewer, I listen and comment primarily on the musical content.

EnglishAssassin wrote: artguyken wrote: OK... I'm a bit baffled. For those who scorn the idea of Christian Prog or think it's laughable, I have to ask why? If there is no truth and all ideas are equal, then what difference does it make if someone wants to sing about their religious beliefs? Where's the tolerance of ideas? You shouldn't act so surprised.  Just as some of the Christians commenting in this thread have suggested they find free-thinking or anti-religious lyrics difficult to accept, it can be equally off-putting from the other perspective.  I don't, speaking as an atheist, object in the least to the occasional Christian theme cropping up in Dream Theater's lyrics, but I find Neal Morse's endless proselytising quite thoroughly unpalatable in a way that wholly puts me off listening to his music. As an aside, I'm slightly perplexed by the suggestion that the non-religious should be expected to believe that "there is no truth and all ideas are equal".

No, not surprised -- and I understand what you're saying. It's an issue of world view. The prevailing post-modernist thought is generally the idea that truth is what you make it, that there is no absolute truth (in response to your last perplexity). My musing was in response to the idea that all ideas are equal, which many people profess over here.

I understand that for you, Neal's lyrics are off putting. Certainly "Testmony" is very direct in its proclamations, but then the title describes it perfectly; it is his testimony of what his life was like, the despair that he felt and the joy and freedom that he experienced in accepting Jesus as Messiah. For someone who finds that idea repugnant, I can understand that it would grate. My questions are more for those who claim to be completely open minded or simply don't believe that lyrical content is particularly important. ("One" is much less direct, though it is a retelling of creation, fall, despair and reconcilliation.)

Musicians sing about what is important to them, some more metaphorically than others. Neither Kansas or Proto-Kaw are "Christian" bands, but "Somewhere to Elsewhere" by Kansas, and "Before Became After" and "The Wait of Glory" are penned by Kerry Livgren, who is a follower of Jesus. Having been involved in Livgren & Proto-Kaw discussion groups that are comprised of a great variety of belief matrices, his writing seems to be embraced, pre & post conversion, by those professing faith and those in the groups who do not. There is a greater subtlety in his writing than in Neal's.

The spectrum of how "in your face" people's beliefs are presented is as broad within the CProg arena as they are for just general prog. And, as you alluded, if there was an Atheist Prog association, I'd generally not be interested. Generally, because as a person of faith, it wouldn't appeal to me, though there might be bands that still had some interesting things to say.

Which brings me back to what I really was trying to say in my earlier posts and that's to not write off the bands/artists who are in the CProg camp because you think it's going to all be Praise Jesus music. It's not. And as I said earlier, labels can be helpful, but can also be detrimental. I'd rather just judge a band individually by their music and lyrics whether or not they appeal. As a reviewer, I listen and comment primarily on the musical content.