CPR (Christian Progressive Rock)

The Dark Elf wrote: Vompatti wrote: I generally feel uncomfortable listening to bands who are using music as a device to promote certain ideas instead of critically examining them.   I am not a Christian, and haven't been since I left Catholic school in my teens. What I find amusing is that many rock fans will readily accept satanic imagery in videos and on albums, but get their panties in a bunch when someone sings about god (or gods if you're Hindu). Don't get me wrong, I love Black Sabbath and such, but I've never denigrated someone for stating their beliefs in a song, even if it's something I disagree with. If the music is excellent and the message is genuine, then it is a worthwhile listen. Again, I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in satan either. Man is evil enough and needs no external source to commit atrocities. There is very little critical examination in music in general, and for the most part thoughtful lyrics are few and far between.

Maybe that's because the satanic message usually doesn't really come through all that growling?

^good advice

Barking Weasel wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in satan either. Man is evil enough and needs no external source to commit atrocities.

Then how is it evil if it's not compared to a standard?

Any Colour You Like wrote: Eärendil wrote: Barking Weasel wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in satan either. Man is evil enough and needs no external source to commit atrocities. Then how is it evil if it's not compared to a standard? Because no such standard exists.

Eärendil wrote: Any Colour You Like wrote: Eärendil wrote: Barking Weasel wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in satan either. Man is evil enough and needs no external source to commit atrocities. Then how is it evil if it's not compared to a standard? Because no such standard exists. I often think of evil simply as a lack of good, but even if you consider it a separate power, it still requires some sort of standard.  Inherently it's a comparison to a standard.  You can't say that a thing is worse without comparing it to something else.

And you need a god for that? Considering that humans have created a countless number of gods, they certainly are capable of creating standards without one. If one considers the ten commandments, for instance, one is struck at just how many concern property. The shrewd Hebrew priests who invented the commandments were certainly intent on ensuring:

Epignosis wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: Eärendil wrote: Any Colour You Like wrote: Eärendil wrote: Barking Weasel wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in satan either. Man is evil enough and needs no external source to commit atrocities. Then how is it evil if it's not compared to a standard? Because no such standard exists. I often think of evil simply as a lack of good, but even if you consider it a separate power, it still requires some sort of standard.  Inherently it's a comparison to a standard.  You can't say that a thing is worse without comparing it to something else. And you need a god for that? Considering that humans have created a countless number of gods, they certainly are capable of creating standards without one. If one considers the ten commandments, for instance, one is struck at just how many concern property. The shrewd Hebrew priests who invented the commandments were certainly intent on ensuring:   1) their jobs, first of all, hence all the religious gobbledy-gook meant to maintain their positions and their status as purveyors of the "true religion" (thou shalt have no other gods before me -- and don't make idols, they are costly and the money is better spent put in our coffers).   2) you didn't kill them   3) you didn't screw their wives   4) you didn't even dare check out their wives' asses over at the well   5) you didn't steal their stuff   6) you didn't even dare thinking about stealing their stuff   7) they were the only ones who could think up various religious lies -- you were not allowed to bear false witness, however. Because Hebrew priests wandering in the wilderness were so rich and had land they owned! Or that they enforced the law themselves! Or that they formed a majority among their own people! Gah- such cynical ignorance...

JesusisLord wrote: Think not that i have come to send peace on earth, I came not to send peace but a sword......                                                                                             Jesus Christ...Matthew 10:34  The sheer mention of God or his Son, Jesus Christ, immediately brings division, especially here to our beloved ProgArchives.....Thats the way it has always been and always be....God divided the light from the darkness all the way back at the beginning and in the fullness of times he will divide the sheep from the goats, the wheat from the tares, the saved from the lost....You are bothered by the mention of his name because you are not one of His. It doesn't bother you when they sing of pixies, fairies and all assortment of other gods, but mention His name and your immediately on the defense. Why? Be honest, It's not the "preachy Christians" that bother you but rather,  it's the fact that you just don't like or want the GOD of the Bible.....                Jesus said unto them, If GOD were your Father ye would love me for I proceeded forth and came from GOD... John 8:42

Edited by progkidjoel - May 18 2011 at 05:51

The fact is, many truly gifted musicians have been neglected or dismissed because they were Christian, so it makes sense that Christian record labels were started to support these musicians and bands and get their work out there. For example, most of us have heard of, say, BEGGAR'S BANQUET, LAYLA AND OTHER LOVE SONGS, and HIGHWAY 61 REVISITED; most of us could easily identify the artists as the Rolling Stones, Derek and the Dominoes (re: Eric Clapton), and Dylan. But how many here have heard of Larry Norman's masterpieces like "Only Visiting This Planet" and "In Another Land," from the early 70s - albums which I will match against any other great rocks albums of the period? How many have heard of the Daniel Amos band's prog masterpiece about, of course, the end of the world, "Shotgun Angel"? And this same band managed to continue to make challenging albums, even as they made the transition to a somewhat more new wave/post-punk outfit.

Speaking of post-punk or alternative music, while R.E.M. got all the press (along with, say, Bob Mould and Sugar), who has heard of Adam Again, with their spate of excellent 80s and 90s albums, beginning with the masterful "Ten Songs by Adam Again" and ending with "Perfecta" - any one of which, had they been released by REM or Mould, would be considered important albums.

The thing is, the ones I have mentioned are those whose appeal would seem to be much wider than a strictly church audience. How about those whose music is much more directed towards worship, but who have managed to make amazing and incredible music? Artists like Rich Mullins and Phil Keaggy (whose Paul McCartney voice and Beatlesque melodies would have made him a bonafide star of the highest caliber if he had chosen to be a secular artist). If it weren't for the Christian music industry, these important artists would probably never have had the chance to pursue their craft and calling.

Jake Kobrin wrote: Why do Christians always have to hi-jack genres and make them Christian-specific? Why can't they just like the music, and then if they want they can write their own with maybe Christian inspired lyrics, but without "devoting the music in the name of Jesus" or whatever?

Edited by progpositivity - July 14 2011 at 20:37