Anger Thread!

[Iceni]

A topic you lot might want me to address: the concept of modern Christian music. I can't talk about the roots and ancient motivations for the composition of hymns, but I do know that Bach did much of his composing for an ecclesiastical environment. It seems that at one point or another there was a time at which musicians attempted to make music the glorify God and did not think that lyrics were necessary - instead they simply let the power and majestic complexity of the music speak for itself. This distinctly differs from Christian music as it is frequently made today, where subtlety such as not actually referencing God by name is considered a sin of omission. So, to answer the stupid question that gets asked a lot: 'Do Christian bands suck because they're Christian?' The short answer is no. Of course they don't. Religiosity should have no impact on musical capability. On the other hand, it would not be wrong to say that some Christian bands suck because of how they understand the relationship between God and their work. Christian bands frequently claim that the most important thing is that their work glorifies God. Again, nothing wrong with this in and of itself. The thing is, these bands understand the importance of God to be manifest in how they write their lyrics. If a band self-identify as Christian it is often because they feel the need to create a counter-culture movement. This was particularly true with the 'unblack' movement, spearheaded by Horde. Such bands thought it was important to create a safe alternative to the anti-clericalism of black metal at the time. 'Safe' is the key word here. Frequently Christian music made as a counter-cultural statement is intended to be safe. It is made because the members are so fixed on the importance of the theological purity of their lyrics that they forget to make good music. Most ironically they also forget to write lyrics that are anything more intelligent than a Sunday school song. Furthermore, it is designed to mimic popular groups in order to get a broader audience. As a result, it ends up being a thoroughly subpar copy of preexisting music made only to provide safe words to the same kinds of songs. Again, even this desire to be counter-culture need not be a problem. Antestor, Pantokrator and the awesome Crimson Moonlight were all part of this movement but they saw the importance of being better than or at the very least on par with the bands they were competing against. Unfortunately, because of the broader nature of Christian music as a counter-cultural movement rather than a musical art form, it suffers from a poor stigma right out of the gate. Some Christian bands, like Extol, Trouble, Theocracy, Holy Blood, Rob Rock, Slechtvalk and the aforementioned Antestor have been noticed and enjoyed by non-Christians, but as is evident from some of the frankly stupid remarks in the unblack metal thread, they haven't made enough of an impact yet. This stigma is so extensive that even well-liked bands that seem Christian in all but name (Miseration, My Silent Wake and Darkwater) rarely out themselves as such. Dharok from Sympathy specifically stated that he wished not to be associated with the Christian metal scene in Canada because he thought most of the music was rubbish. Given that this is the nation responsible for Thousand Foot Krutch I can't really blame him. Christian music need not be terrible, but lyrical difference alone does not carry a band. Until more bands realize that they must perform as musicians as well as Christians, the 'genre', such as it is, will continue to stagnate.

[RelentlessOblivion]

People who sit next to you on the bus and start talking to you when they can see you have headphones on and then act all pissed when you don't immediately stop what you're doing and talk to them. FUCK OFF!!! it's an hour and a half bus ride from my house to uni and just as long back I am not sitting through that without some means of occupying the time and if that means I ignore some old lady who wants to rant about how if I get on buses for free everyone should. You know why I get on buses for free? Because being vision impaired means I am entirely reliant on public transport so the government facilitates such things for my benefit. Try being me for a day you miserable old cow I bet you'd find it the most challenging thing you've ever done and be constantly complaining about how hard it is. I don't do either of those things (well ok I do complain about it a bit). Why are people so fucking ignorant?

[Iceni]

Sounds like a very irritating woman. Headbang or keep your eyes closed, it works for me.

Why are people so fucking ignorant?

Might be more helpful to ask why they feel the need to foist their stupidity on others. My dad and brother go to a church where most of the members are not particularly smart or insightful, but they're nice people and they don't impose. They're not forcible or coercive at all, they just seem happy to get together with their families and worship. A very easygoing lot who seem to behave as a church should.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Sadly that's not my experience of churches. Perhaps if it had been I would not have turned atheist quite as early.

[Iceni]

Sadly that's not my experience of churches. Perhaps if it had been I would not have turned atheist quite as early.

It's not mine either, this is the first one that's been like this except my old Presbyterian church. Most of the ones around town are probably every bit as stupid as you'd think.

[RelentlessOblivion]

I'll give you an example of my experience with churches. My younger brother (he was 8 at the time so this would be when I was 10) had a mullet because he wanted to be like his favourite AFL player. We go to church because we weren't lapsed catholic (family generally) or atheist (myself) at the time. My brother is accused of being a satanist (at eight years old) because he has a mullet.

[Iceni]

My brother is accused of being a satanist (at eight years old) because he has a mullet.

Well that's just stupid. I've gotten crap for my long hair before but never something so blatant as that.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Because an eight year old is actually going to know what the hell this person is on about...

[Ghouly]

I'll give you an example of my experience with churches. My younger brother (he was 8 at the time so this would be when I was 10) had a mullet because he wanted to be like his favourite AFL player. We go to church because we weren't lapsed catholic (family generally) or atheist (myself) at the time. My brother is accused of being a satanist (at eight years old) because he has a mullet.

My own family accused me of being a devil worshipper and going to hell for having my hair dyed black (this was a long time ago, hair was different). I have not spoken a word to that ignorant bible f*cking side of my family since 2001. No plans to resume it. I won't accept their brand of hatred and brainwashing.

[RelentlessOblivion]

It's a shame that so many people have these negative experiences with religion and religious people. I think that's really why so many people turn away from religion.

[Iceni]

It's a shame that so many people have these negative experiences with religion and religious people. I think that's really why so many people turn away from religion.

It's maddening, too, because it's completely unnecessary. Of all the reasons to abandon an idea that has to rank as one of the worst. If you think God is illogical, or that Christ cannot have existed, or that the Bible is too specious I can at least give that thinking the benefit of being a logical connection. However, the stupidity of some adherents is not a sufficient reason for tossing out the book they read. This is true of organized religion, anyway. I imagine BAN is one of the exceptions to the rule, but a lot of people go for the 'spiritual but not religious' moniker, which the vast majority of the time strikes me as a massive cop-out more than anything else. It means not having to put up with the inevitable termination of consciousness or defend the idea that there is no kind of spirituality anywhere at all - but also not having to defend the idea of an omnipotent and loving God, or any dogma at all other than your own convenience.

[Ghouly]

Just to clarify I never turned away from religion, my parents were atheists and I was raised in a house without religious influence of any kind. But lets just say, the situation certainly didn't warm me up to religion. It was a distant cousin, we share a great-aunt, and he was from several states away - we were all gathered together for a funeral. He brought out his whole family and they are all extremely religious. His children and wife all told me I was going to hell if i didn't accept jesus into my life and that dressing as I did and coloring my hair black marked me as a devil-worshipper. These are people who didn't know me, judging me and being prejudiced against me, their own family! I have never spoken to them again because of it. Now, my view on religion and belief in god is another subject entirely. But I can absolutely relate to being treated like shit by Christians for nothing more than the way I look. I can say I've never gotten that treatment from any other religious group. Kinda sad. editing to add: I can see how this appears that I am biased against all christians. I'm not. I'm very open-minded when it comes to other people practicing their religion. I don't hate people who are Christian. My issue is with ignorant, judgemental people of any kind, but my sad experience has been the most negative with one particular group. Could be coincidence more than anything I suppose.

[FatherAlabaster]

Ghouly, that sounds like a small example of what I went through in North Carolina. And Iceni, I take your point, but it's hard not to be prejudiced against a group of people and their shared belief, when most of them discriminate against you growing up. At the very least, if their real goal was to "save" me, they were going about it the wrong way.

[Iceni]

Just to clarify I never turned away from religion, my parents were atheists and I was raised in a house without religious influence of any kind. But lets just say, the situation certainly didn't warm me up to religion. It was a distant cousin, we share a great-aunt, and he was from several states away - we were all gathered together for a funeral. He brought out his whole family and they are all extremely religious. His children and wife all told me I was going to hell if i didn't accept jesus into my life and that dressing as I did and coloring my hair black marked me as a devil-worshipper. These are people who didn't know me, judging me and being prejudiced against me, their own family! I have never spoken to them again because of it. Now, my view on religion and belief in god is another subject entirely. But I can absolutely relate to being treated like shit by Christians for nothing more than the way I look. I can say I've never gotten that treatment from any other religious group. Kinda sad. editing to add: I can see how this appears that I am biased against all christians. I'm not. I'm very open-minded when it comes to other people practicing their religion. I don't hate people who are Christian. My issue is with ignorant, judgemental people of any kind, but my sad experience has been the most negative with one particular group. Could be coincidence more than anything I suppose.

Not really, this country and indeed the whole Western Hemisphere, such as it is, is mostly 'Christian', whatever that actually means to people who say they are. Any and all religious groups can be prejudiced, including atheists. It's just that there happens to be a high concentration of Christians here. I know BAN and NTNR have a particular distaste for Mormonism, living as they do in the world's Mormon capital. I'll reiterate and elaborate upon a point I've made in previous threads that sometimes these folks honestly think they're doing you a favor by being so obtusely bellicose. Perhaps I can offer some particular insight based on my experience. The thing is, 'fundamentalist Christians' as they're frequently called are pumped up on conversion literature that's saturated with juvenile drama (and juvenile characters, mind) and generally very low on discernment. If you read any of Ron Luce's writing it is almost exactly like 'Milestones' by Sayyid Qutb, and for those of you who don't know he's the man who started the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The assumption they're fed from all this is that conversion comes in a blinding flash of light, the full revelation of Christ borne by an angel who bears a resemblance to John Cooper from Skillet. This generates the further assumption that the potency of Scripture will somehow pummel people into the kind of emotional desperation needed to convert. Indeed, they try to do the same kind of thing. Six times I've been to Acquire the Fire, a conference that is supposed to rejuvenate your faith, presumably in much the same way as taking Viagra increases your libido. These conferences specifically increase the level of pathos and drama through speeches and worship music in the hopes that the audience, mainly teens, will somehow break down emotionally and 'make a commitment' to Christ that seems really really meaningful and totally not temporary at the time but completely fricking dies two days later. Trust me, I've done it and it never stuck. The concept of a slow change seems beyond these folks (maybe that explains the distaste for evolution?) and the idea of prolonged maturity in faith escapes them. They do not think in the long term. You can blame them in part for the attitudes of the people you come across. I certainly do.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Adelaide, my home town, is also called "the city of churches" we have more churches then shops here and I'm not even kidding about that. Most of the time though when I bump into christians they're nice enough people (like our good friend Iceni). Some will actively try to convert people using the belligerent approach described by our resident iceman and that's annoying as hell. A few like those I described on the other page will both reprimand you for not giving yourself up to God (spouting the usual BS), threaten you with eternal suffering in hell just because you look a certain way (A friend of mine who actually is christian was called a devil-worshipping animal just because he wasn't wearing a cross). Now that may link in with what Iceni is saying or it may be the case that these people are just assholes whose actions don't actually reflect the attitudes of their peers.

[RelentlessOblivion]

It's maddening' date=' too, because it's completely unnecessary. Of all the reasons to abandon an idea that has to rank as one of the worst. If you think God is illogical, or that Christ cannot have existed, or that the Bible is too specious I can at least give [i']that thinking the benefit of being a logical connection. However, the stupidity of some adherents is not a sufficient reason for tossing out the book they read. This is true of organized religion, anyway. I imagine BAN is one of the exceptions to the rule, but a lot of people go for the 'spiritual but not religious' moniker, which the vast majority of the time strikes me as a massive cop-out more than anything else. It means not having to put up with the inevitable termination of consciousness or defend the idea that there is no kind of spirituality anywhere at all - but also not having to defend the idea of an omnipotent and loving God, or any dogma at all other than your own convenience.

People choose atheism for a variety of reasons. I actually can't explain why I chose that path but lack of anything I could interpret as evidence of a God was certainly part of it. I disagree however regarding spirituality. As I have said before I do not believe that faith and religion are interchangeable terms. I feel one can believe in a God or Gods without adhering to a particular dogma.

[Iceni]

I disagree however regarding spirituality. As I have said before I do not believe that faith and religion are interchangeable terms. I feel one can believe in a God or Gods without adhering to a particular dogma.

Yes, one certainly can, it's just much easier to do when one's religious orientation is 'ongoing research'. Apparently there are people who do actually take independent spiritualism seriously and are capable of defending it, but almost all of the 'spiritual' people I meet are just pulling stuff out of the wazoo at their own convenience, typically to avoid having to demonstrate their supposed conviction by actually defending whatever they 'believe'.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Now that annoys me. If you're willing to make your stance known then you should be willing to defend your position if need be.

[Ghouly]

And on that note, WTH does "spiritual" even mean? I've heard people say "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" and I'm like... wut... Belief in spirits? Belief in bullsh*t like reiki and "vibes" and auras? I have no idea. I personally never got that explanation. I've always considered myself a "hopeful agnostic". I neither believe in, nor disbelieve in a divine creator. But I sure as hell hope there is one, and along with it, some kind of afterlife or meaning to my existence. Not bettin' on it though.

[RelentlessOblivion]

I suppose it depends on your definition of "afterlife". I would bet on at least some degree of consciousness existing for a time after death in some cases but then I believe firmly in the paranormal

[Iceni]

I've heard people say "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" and I'm like... wut... [...] I've always considered myself a "hopeful agnostic". I neither believe in, nor disbelieve in a divine creator. But I sure as hell hope there is one, and along with it, some kind of afterlife or meaning to my existence. Not bettin' on it though.

That's generally my reaction too. However, I would argue, regarding agnosticism, that intellectual openness is not a religion. Most agnostics I've met are generally de facto atheists even if they are willing to admit the possibility of the existence of God. In the meantime, however, they have to choose something to determine what moral choices they make, so they work with the assumption, based on what they know, that there isn't a God.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Agnosticism is a catch-all term I think. I see it as a cop-out. You never have to defend such a view because you're "open-minded". I don't believe there is a God, haven't done for a long time now, that's a position which will only change if or when evidence to the contrary reveals itself.

[Ghouly]

That's generally my reaction too. However, I would argue, regarding agnosticism, that intellectual openness is not a religion.

I agree. I don't think I said agnosticism was my religion. I don't consider myself to have one. Unless you're arguing rhetorically in which case, carry on!

Most agnostics I've met are generally de facto atheists even if they are willing to admit the possibility of the existence of God. In the meantime' date= however, they have to choose something to determine what moral choices they make, so they work with the assumption, based on what they know, that there isn't a God.

[RelentlessOblivion]

But there probably was a Jesus even if he wasn't divine in any way, shape or form, one would not be trying to disprove the existance of a man.

[Ghouly]

But there probably was a Jesus even if he wasn't divine in any way' date=' shape or form, one would not be trying to disprove the existance of a man.[/quote'] Fair enough. I was more implying "jesus, the son of god, risen from the dead, etc"