The New Neal Morse Appreciation Thread

I check in on this thread occasionally as I love most of Neal's music.  Now I see zumacraig has gone off ranting!  Not a surprise though, from his comments on the Flower Kings thread over the past year or two.  While I actually agree with him almost completely, I find this sort of discussion is not really suited for music appreciation threads.......don't we have a place on the site for non-musical discussion? (there is, it's called General Discussion )

It used to really bother me that Neal focused on such Christian lyrics and themes, to the point that I avoided buying his music.  After a while though, I just decided that music isn't about beliefs or political views or anything besides "moving air molecules around" (to paraphrase Frank Zappa).  It can be used as a vehicle for such things, but that is completely secondary to me........though I do enjoy good lyrics.  On Momentum, I liked that Neal has toned it down a couple notches, and the lyrics were no longer such blatant references to his beliefs.  Not that there is anything wrong with that per say, but I just got tired of it because it's not something I relate to.  However, I have found that I CAN relate to his general theme of being lost and confused and not sure what to believe.  I just didn't come to the same resolution as he did (I'm not an atheist, but I'm not a Christian and don't follow a specific belief system......they are all man made and man is, as should be obvious to everyone by now, inherently flawed and self deceiving).

Anyway, getting back to music, I wasn't crazy about Momentum musically.  I have always loved Neal's "patented prog formula", as I call it, but it has started to get old for me.  I'm hoping on the new TA some more risks will be taken, some new avenues will be explored.  I seriously doubt this will happen though, as TA knows what their fans want.......good old fashioned retro 70's prog with modern production values and approaches.  This still can be quite good for my tastes, but we'll see.  I really liked the Whirlwind, but wouldn't ever call it a masterpiece or even great.  Just very good and suited to my tastes.  So we'll see.

In any case, I have a great deal of respect for Morse, despite my not sharing his religious beliefs.  My feeling has always been, more power to him for doing what he loves and saying what he wants to say.  More and more musicians are doing that these days, with less and less reward for it.  And who am I to judge another persons motivations anyway?

@infandous,

right i`m wondering why you come on a website that is for the neal morse. appreciation. so do you all listen to.

^ I stopped trying to get people to listen to any music I like eons ago...it makes no sense trying to convince someone to like what you like.

Crumple,

Infantile as in 'pleasing father god'. Believing the Big Other will save me from the human condition. Lack of ability to think beyond the implications of one's beliefs or question such beliefs.

What questions are you going to answer?

The danger is that you say you believe in some loving god.  Is this the god of the bible?  Because this is not the god of the bible.  The god of the bible precisely called on his followers to kill in his name.  In addition, it's dangerous to believe in some sort of salvation that requires arbitrary action, belief, words while those that do not ascribe to such beliefs are...left to hell?  It's infantile and dangerous to not take responsibility for the implications of your mythological beliefs in a world where it's obvious you have no corner on the truth.  Saying, 'I'm puzzled' is an infantile response.

AlanB wrote: Welcome to the forum, Crumple, from a fellow Neal Morse fan. I got into Neal's music via Transatlantic and I now have all his prog albums except Lifeline (which from what I've heard isn't worth getting). I love Question and Sola especially, but parts of the others are great also. Testimony 2 is worth getting just for Seeds of Gold.   I too am not sure why belief in a loving, forgiving God is infantile, even more puzzling is why Zumacraig thinks it's dangerous? Surely the dangerous beliefs are those that say it's a good thing to kill people in the name of your religion, and that certainly isn't what Neal believes.

What the "Zuma" was trying to reference was the evolutionary meme adaption that homo sapiens has used quite effectively to protect their offspring from Harm.
When a child is told not to go near the river on your own , because a crocodile may get you - they need to believe their parents. Because if you live near an African
or Australian river - then this is very good advice.
Unfortunately, children are programmed to believe everything their parents tell them, even the damaging things (like playing with your willy will make you go blind!)
As we grow older we test some hypothesis, and find it to be false! (like Father xmas, when you find out that it's your dad who eats the mince pie and nicks the large
carrot to use on your mother later that night!).
Anyway - people who dismiss father xmas should then also dismiss a personal god who listens to prayers, since I tested that hypothesis out
when I was 11 and Debbie Harry didn't appear naked in my bed!!!


Edited by M27Barney - November 28 2013 at 13:04

AlanB wrote: M27Barney wrote:  I tested that hypothesis out when I was 11 and Debbie Harry didn't appear naked in my bed!!!  Good thing too, otherwise Ms Harry would be the next celebrity arrested for kiddie-fiddling.....

I lost my virginity when I was 15....to a sixteen year old - technically making her a paedophile and liable to prosecution. though I think that the Police/CPS are unlikely to take up my case

I'm unclear on how the supposition that "man created God" is in anyway related to an infants perception that they are the center of the universe?  I would never claim that I, personally, created God.  Nor would I ever claim that I, or even mankind as a whole, is the center of the universe.  I don't think you'll find a single atheist that would ever claim such a thing (certainly not an atheist who is a scientist, or understands anything about science).  Yet I feel certain that man created the God of the bible, since it was written by men (same with any other holy book you care to name).  I'm not an atheist myself, and I don't really strongly support either side of this argument.  However, the center of an infants universe is not itself, but it's parents, so I'd say belief in an all powerful father figure is far more infantile than the belief that we are merely a conglomeration of matter, no more important or special than any other conglomeration of matter.  But that's just my feeling.

Personally, I'm fine with people have strong religious beliefs, as long as they are not trying to force them down my throat.  I don't feel that Morse ever does this on his albums, or even in interviews and such.  So I've never had a problem with his lyrics in that regard, only in the fact that I get tired of the same tired old subject for every track on every album (or nearly so, anyway).  I realize that he's found something that gives him peace and happiness and want to share that with the world, but as an artist, surely he has other interesting topics he could put to music?  In any case, the music itself is enjoyable to me, and the lyrics don't really bother me, so until that changes I'm good with what he does.


Edited by infandous - December 02 2013 at 11:27

Crumple wrote: zumacraig wrote: The danger is that you say you believe in some loving god.  Is this the god of the bible?  Because this is not the god of the bible.  The god of the bible precisely called on his followers to kill in his name.  In addition, it's dangerous to believe in some sort of salvation that requires arbitrary action, belief, words while those that do not ascribe to such beliefs are...left to hell?  It's infantile and dangerous to not take responsibility for the implications of your mythological beliefs in a world where it's obvious you have no corner on the truth.  Saying, 'I'm puzzled' is an infantile response. Obviously its impossible for you to have any objective thought about your religion much less be critical about your beliefs.  To someone who has thought rigorously and seriously about this stuff for decades 'infantile' and 'dangerous' are just the tip of the iceberg.   Thanks for elaborating a bit on on labeling Neal's faith "infantile". When I think of "infantile" I think of "revolves around me".  Because the only thing infants are capable of is worrying about themselves.  they are the center of their universe.  Which, in an adult, many times leads to the conclusion that man created God, e.g. your statement about mythological beliefs. Christians, on the other hand, belief precisely the opposite.  Infantile is, therefore, an inaccurate descriptor for Christians. As for the post above, I would question your definition of love.  I agree with what you say is in the Bible...and add to it that in many places it says to FEAR God.  But it's short sighted to stop there and not ask WHY God acted that way and then WHAT he did to rectify the problem. And if we are going to talk about Neal's faith...and he has put it out there to discuss for sure...and you are going to rail against it...perhaps you would share what you have put your faith in so we may see the contrast?