Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find enjoyment in some classic hymns, but not in any 'modern' Christian music. I grew up as a Catholic, so a lot of the Protestant hymns that many of you may be sick and tired of from your formative years are new to me.
Les Miserables is one of my favorite books and musicals, and it's hard to find a work of fiction (other than the Bible ) that's so heavy-laden with Christian imagery.
You know, I find those so hard to read now. I loved Narnia as a kid, but rereading them as a non-believer was really unsettling. The same with some of Lewis's apologetic works. When I was a believer I thought them profound, but now I see a lot more holes and issues that are just sort of plastered over and ignored.
For me Tolkein is still fantastic. I think the biggest difference is that Tolkein was aiming for a compelling story of mythic proportions, and it happened to be informed by his faith. Lewis was using his writing as a vehicle for his faith, and it is much less universally accessible.
In some ways I get a little sad that these things that were so important to me growing up have lost their lustre, but I guess that is what growing up does.
Am I the only one here who is a fan of some Christian music and movies? As I've displayed several times, I am an Atheist, but I actually do enjoy several Christian Rock bands along with some Christian movies. The movies I enjoy a bit less because I feel they don't try too hard to appeal to those who aren't Christians. You can't really find many Christian movies that avoid basically shoving "God" in your face. On the other hand, it seems like to a lot of Christian Rock bands, music is music. Just because they are Christian Rock bands does not mean that they need to sing about God in every song. I feel like their music is definitely a step up from all this rap and hip hop that can't find anything to talk about other than sex, drugs and alcohol. It brings hope to a world that is slowly falling apart and turning into non stop violence. Skillet, Thousand Foot Krutch, The Letter Black, Red...and several others. They are able to be Christian Rock bands without shoving their religion into your face. I'm not sure I could ever go to one of their concerts, but I do enjoy their music. I feel like a lot of Christians find it strange that Atheists actually enjoy Christian music.
I'm a Christian (sorta) and I can't stand Christian rock. Hymns are for church, well... that stuff, I dunno. It's not because I have some "rock is the devil's music" mentality, I listen to quite a bit of pop rock. It's either hopelessly preachy, or it's a positive message using a very downer tune.
The only songs I like in this regard are those that could both apply to a human love or a divine one. Because, to me that's the point, how can you really claim to love God if you can't stand other people?
"Oh Lord I've been waiting for you" in this song, could mean...
Oh Lord, I've been waiting for you. As in, there's a person I've been waiting for, and (thank God) I've found them, they're my soulmate.
OR
Oh Lord, I've been waiting for you. As in, I've been waiting for you Lord.
The song talks about having learned to love abuse too, so it could be about finding imperfect relationships, before finding one's soulmate. Or they got mistreated by humans so then they found God.
This confusion to me, is the point. If a song can't apply to both human and divine love, you get the same feeling as when you hear people talk about animal rights while beating up other people.
Quote:
You know, I find those so hard to read now. I loved Narnia as a kid, but rereading them as a non-believer was really unsettling. The same with some of Lewis's apologetic works. When I was a believer I thought them profound, but now I see a lot more holes and issues that are just sort of plastered over and ignored.
For me Tolkein is still fantastic. I think the biggest difference is that Tolkein was aiming for a compelling story of mythic proportions, and it happened to be informed by his faith. Lewis was using his writing as a vehicle for his faith, and it is much less universally accessible.
My Dad once said during a sermon (yay, preacher's kid) that C.S. Lewis was originally pretty much a hardline atheist, until Tolkien showed him how all these fairy tales and myths were part of a spiritual framework. So yea, it'd make sense that for him it'd be more about the story.
Last edited by bulmabriefs144; 05-29-2013 at 07:07 AM..
I agree. As a kid, I loved the Perelandra stories, though the anti science/atheist polemic was obvious to this kid (who did not see God as credible as far back as I can remember) even then, the reversed snobbery and appeals to faith in Narnia let alone the obvious crucifixion of Aslan (more obvious even than Gandalf's resurrection) made it obvious that we had a Christian apologist at work even before I read the Screwtape letters. I enjoyed that, too. The obvious objection was that it was fiction, Lewis knew nothing about demons and it was all speculation.
His apologetics (I only see them secondhand as I never read his Christian propaganda books) were as you say, full of logical holes and his arguments have been shown up as soundly as Pascal's wager to be totally false. The Lord, Liar or Lunatic one is a classic logical fallacy of bifurcation (or trifurcation). It fails because of a fourth possibility - that he was as deluded as many another religious leader and fifth; that he didn't actually say and do the things on which this assessment is based.
I am still a LOR fan, even though I disagree with and even disapprove of Tolkien's rather white supremacist fantasy that Northern/Saxon Catholics should have galloped to Constantinople, driving the heathen into the sea and replacing the 'Steward' with a proper Christian king. Nor am I impressed by his delusion that, if you go back far enough, war becomes decent and noble.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 05-29-2013 at 07:35 AM..
For me Tolkein is still fantastic. I think the biggest difference is that Tolkein was aiming for a compelling story of mythic proportions, and it happened to be informed by his faith. Lewis was using his writing as a vehicle for his faith, and it is much less universally accessible.
Tolkein's objective was to create an epic mythology for the English speaking peoples. Lewis' objective was to be an apologist. Big difference.
Lewis' loss of his wife nearly destroyed him and nearly pried theism from his brain. I have always felt for the man, and identified with him. He never quite managed to make the un-leap of un-faith though.
The Lord, Liar or Lunatic one is a classic logical fallacy of bifurcation (or trifurcation) It fails because of a fourth possibility - that he was as deluded as many another religious leader and fifth; that he didn't actually say and do the things on which this assessment is based.
I well remember that Bill Bright of Campus Crusade for Christ used this argument in proselytizing college students. I remember it in particular because we had a 16-2/3 RPM vinyl recording of one of his talks and I played it many times as a child. The pseudo-intellectualism appealed to my child's mind. In a theist society even the "unchurched" are hesitant to transgress a taboo like the other alternatives you mention -- it's blasphemy to suggest that Jesus was deluded or non-existent. This is how theism wins arguments, by closing off options from consideration.
Tolkein's objective was to create an epic mythology for the English speaking peoples. Lewis' objective was to be an apologist. Big difference.
Exactly! I think this is where I see a difference. There are some that create art or literature that is shaped by their faith. The focus is the creation, which flows out of who that person is (which is shaped by religion no doubt). In this case we can get works like LotR, or Bach's Passions, or Michelangelo's Creation.
The other side is when you wrap your faith in a vehicle to try to "infiltrate" pop culture or even just focus on it as a tool for evangelism or devotional meditation instead of art. Then we wind up with Stryper's "To Hell with the Devil", Rich Mullins' "Screen Door on a Submarine" (catchy tune, but pretty inaccessible to anyone outside the faithful), or Lewis' Narnia books. Not that these things are bad in and of themselves (Ok, Stryper was pretty awful, if I take off my nostalgia glasses...), but they are not universal art. They have settled for being art by Christians, for Christians and have relegated themselves to the artistic ghetto.
I don't think it is strange. If a melody sounds good it doesn't matter to me who is playing it. If someone has a good voice I don't care are about their beliefs. Heck, I hardly know the words to most songs I like. There are plenty of christmas songs that I really enjoy listening to.
Agree w/this^.
Am an atheist but I totally dig chant music (Gregorian monks & such), whether a capella or mixed/set to a beat
(if it's in Latin, all the better-so that I don't know what the lyrics mean & therefore miss the religious content).
Also, some old gospel/blues stuff. There's a lot of feeling and emotion in there, even if I don't agree with it. It's also not as preachy, but people singing about personal struggle.
New-ish Christian pop/rock/country? Gag me. That **** drives me bonkers. See the South Park episode about it.
I'm a Christian (sorta) and I can't stand Christian rock. Hymns are for church, well... that stuff, I dunno. It's not because I have some "rock is the devil's music" mentality, I listen to quite a bit of pop rock. It's either hopelessly preachy, or it's a positive message using a very downer tune.
That's interesting, because I heard the exact same thing from an old friend, who was also Christian. That friendship was obviously destroyed by Religion, but that's neither here nor there. I asked why it was never played on Christian radio stations and she said because it's not really Christian music. I think it's basically a shot in the face to Christians who perform Christian Rock music. Most of their songs have meanings that have to do with Jesus, but Christians still argue that it's not Christian music. Why? I really have no idea. I really things it's because of it's heavy sound and when people thing of Christian music, they usually thing of soft and slow gospel sounds. My old friend said that she would explain it to me, but she said that I wouldn't understand anyway. I guess us Atheists just don't understand...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) that's so heavy-laden with Christian imagery.
