Once, religion gave us Bach and the Sistine Chapel. That was then; now religion gives us…
-
Holy Flash Abuse, Batman! You have to see the intro page for the International Congress of Churches & Ministers to believe it. Somebody had way too much coffee.
- If your religious kitsch preferences are more old school, try crafting a god box.
A God box is an object of intense beauty used for manifesting goodness in your life. You can buy it or build it. You can adorn it with faux finishes, faux lapis, strings soaked in glue, making loops, like spaghetti rococco, then paint it, varnish it, maybe gluing on many sparkling, faux jewels or pearls.
You can do a collage of cut out magazine photos, or seed catalogue flowers or pictures of saints, Gods and Goddesses. You'll come across the most beautiful articles to put on the outside of your box, if you look at graphics, posters, magazines and the calendars made by the popular painter, THOMAS KINKAID, or Renaissance poster art.
-
Web pages are for nerds. Glitter and glued pasta is for Sunday School. You are hardcore. For your art, you go to the Church of Body Modification. (Warning! Photos of people achieving god-insight through intense pain will be in your face if you click on that link!)
- Log in to post comments
Nothing shows the intense beauty of god like crappy grade-school crafts.
Where do I go to sue ICCM for the epileptic fit they just gave me?
It's an old saying, but if you can't dazzle 'em with your brilliance...
Then again, maybe it was just some kid doing a computer project, putting in as much as he could without a clue.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592
I love it... The only problem is that something like that should be the opening for an epic action movie.
I'd prefer something more along the line of Bajoran Orbs.
Yah! Effen A, man! Thomas Kinkaid for GAWD!
There's an awful lot of "faux" in that faithbuilding godbox stuff. You'd think somebody would have noticed...
Let's not forget all the contemporary crap Christian music clogging up FM radio waves. Nothing, and I mean nothing, is worse than Lifeway Christian Bookstore "artists".
"Holy Flash Abuse, Batman!"
Thank you! Thank you so much! My eyes are now bleeding.
Ooh ! The Church 'O Body Mods has a poll we could crash but I'm truly not sure how to vote.
I've seen fleamarkets with classier wares than that... UGH
The ICCM Flash overload reminded me of Brass Eye (UK comedy genius)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye
I think I just had a seizure watching that.
Holy Flash Abuse, Batman!"
There should be a counter at the side : Number of epilepsy induced visions this month.
Somebody, somewhere, is trying too hard.
Please grasp the bars wired to a battery on either side of the logo to receive your religious experience. (I wonder if it has to be a Baghdad Battery, or if a lawn mower battery would be an acceptable modern substitute....)
Oh My Zod....
That ICCM site sent me into a seizure.
MY EYES!!!! I'M BLIND!!!!
Gazing upon that turned my rods and cones into pillars of salt.
Maybe that ICCM website is actually a very clever plot. The flashes trigger seizures, which may be confused with religious experiences. This is all just a trick to convert us!
Persephone, how many times did I tell you NOT TO OPEN THAT FRAKKIN' BOX!!!
Just a note: The Church of Body Mod isn't really a "church." It was mainly made so that people could join it and claim religious persecution if fired for tattoos/piercings/etc which would've been an excellent exploitation of our silly rules on that, had it been recognized. Nobody takes it seriously anymore (not even its own "ministers").
From the God Box site:
The teacher known as Judith says:...She created a simple ceremony, by myself, with a candle, and burned those papers which had results..."
"By myself"? Sounds like "teacher Judith" is one of those fictional "friends" that "things" happen to when you need advice, no?
For some reason I found myself saying the word "Miranda" then stomping my co-workers into the carpet.
... check out parody news show The Day Today's overblown titles on youtube and tell me that isn't four times as bad.
Please Please Please crash this pointless poll!
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090420/NEWS01/904210322
It want to know if you agree with the catholic bishops' contention that the President is an inappropriate speaker at the Notre Dame commencement due to his stand on abortion rights. Thanks for the help.
"Holy Flash Abuse, Batman!"
The technical term for that is "Flashturbation". It's bad enough when corporations do it, but that was horrible.
I kept waiting for the Jedi to pop onto the screen...
Wow. Seizure inducing.
Dear ICCM-
Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should.
#20: It was Pandora!
Persephone swallowed a seed (INNUENDO ALERT!!) in Hades.
It can be Bigotry in Three Dimensions. My Repressed Urges HIDING PLACE. I Once Served a Useful Purpose. Catholic Schoolgirl Foto Fantasy File. The Smiting Suggestion Box. Cajón de Miedo. L'il Delusion Cube...
I detest Flash for a number of reasons, some more rational than others. That, however, was truly horrible. I would say the same thing even if that website concerned a topic I hold dear.
So this is why Joseph Smith wouldn't allow anyone else to look at the gold plates (ICCM ocular destruction).
A friend of mine, who is very religious, recently said that he could never forgive the modern evangelical movement, especially the mega-churches, for what they have done to sacred music.
I remember some years ago coming home from a lovely performance of the Mozart C-minor Mass. Foolishly, after checking the Weather Channel before going to be I did a little channel surfing and came across Carman doing one of his numbers using "Jewish" melodies. It made me want to purge my ears with an ice pick. If only there actually were a Hell to send people like that to...
...Pathetic Substitute for a PUPPY. Home to My Imaginary FRIEND...
Oops, that should be "going to bed" in #34 above.
http://www.sharperfx.com/
Looks like there are plenty more of these obnoxious flash intros and websites for various ministries, all made by the same company.
that one had me on the floor
When they lack substance, they go for flash. Therefore the religious go for maximum flash.
Hate to break it, but the phrase "God box" is already taken, and means something 1,000 times cooler. At least, if you're a computer geek.
http://arstechnica.com/hardware/guides/2008/09/guide-200809.ars
Actually made it through the ICCM intro to find the most urgent question addressed by the organisation was how to keep the IRS off their backs.
"A God box is an object of intense beauty used for manifesting goodness in your life. You can buy it or build it. You can adorn it with faux finishes... "
Can I use Scarlett Johansson clones?
#37- Nice to see the scammers getting scammed.
@37
The flash intro for the Mime Ministry is intense.
I love how the earth drops into the hands of god with a weighty thump!
Don't know why, but it made me laugh!
Slightly dislectic, when I saw superfx.com, I read it as superfiction.
The Church of Body Modification even have a poll. Unfortunately it's not that ridiculous of a poll, though the results are kinda interesting. I don't even know what 'suspension' is...
I just call mine a stash box...
Bud box? Really?
"Holy Flash Abuse, Batman!"
Jesus!! F*CK YEAH!!!
The start up is pretty bad, but I ventured into the site anyway and looked around. At one time I qualified to be ordained by these tards. It would be interesting to know how they justify ordination of women when it's plainly forbidden.
Most of the questions on their application are about money, sex, drugs and alcohol, aren't we all shocked. *SNORT*
They even have depravity for our local calvinist. :p
As a multimedia designer who often works in Flash, I have to seriously wonder if the client and the designer actually spoke at all during the creative process.
Mathyoo is correct, that is the term. This piece of crap is a true example of the designer who does not change his/her style to suit the client's message. Actually, it's something one might design if one were mocking a religious group, not advertising it.
@ColonelFazackerly
Thank you, I knew it reminded me of something. Brass Eye, yes!
Church of Body Modification? Reminds me of a Tom Smith song.
Holy crap! I feel like I need a cigarette and a glass of scotch after such an intense experience.
Now I'm hungry for spaghetti.
Wow, I just had a holy seizure. And then went into a diabetic coma after reading about the God box.
@37
- K & K Mime -
My Poe gauge is no longer reliable:
http://www.sharperfx.com/kkmime/index3.htm
The ICCM now owes me two Xanax and a change of underpants.
Wow! I think I saw the god thing they keep going on about!
Ack! The ICCM gave me the epilepsy!
It's like a gaggle of epileptics killed the site designers pa, and he's vowed revenge.
Godboxes?!!
Oh dear ...
Please, noöne tell Ben Stein. He hates those things.
Well at least the ICCM suports plate techtonics seeing as they have moved Australia to just off the coast South America and India is now in the North Atlantic. Typical screwed up world view by the religious
I actually liked the ICCM flash intro. To bad it was for an extremely boring assed website. The intro was the best thing about it.
ICCM exec to webmonkey: "Write me some of that 'extreme stuff' that the kids these days are so into. THAT will bring 'em to the Church."
I liked the ICCM flash intro. It was the best intro I have ever seen for a website that's as extremely boring as that one. It was kind of a let down. Man, is that a boring assed website!
When did Micahel Bay start directing Flash website intros?
International Congress of Churches & Ministers -- TOO MUCH FLASH!
If you want to see a very slick looking religious site, the Way of the Master one comes off as very professionally designed. Ray comfortable is a slick web marketer and salesman of his suitcase of tricks.
@ixnu
Ah, K & K Mime! I stumbled across that site a few years ago. Yeah, they're real. If you google "mime ministry" you'll see there are a few other groups like them (like that abstinence clown guy, I guess). Who knew, right?
Now I'm confused. Last time I heard the expression 'God Box', it referred to Canterbury Cathedral....
For pure animation abuse, you can't beat this website: The Price of a Soul - Global Outreach Ministry
Be sure to mouse over the entire page for extra fun!
The flash presentation made me laugh out loud--to which my 4 year old said
"mom, don't laugh at that scary music. You have to get it out of my ears".
PZ, get yourself some of that flash fun right now!
I can think of a lot of perverted stuff to say about the god box but I'm just going to keep my mouth shut.
OUCH - The ICCM site actually hurts.
And are god boxes anything like kitty boxes? cuz i'd hate to have to scoop the godshit every week.
Well that was a WTF!? moment. LOL anyone find the irony in the fact that their websites are really shitty as in, well I threw this together with that Front Page thing from my home Pee-Cee box or go to extremes as YOU CAN DOES FLASH!!!?? I WANT ZZZZZOOOOMMMMMMM!
I just call mine a stash box...
How about a ceremonial spirit box from New Guinea?
"You can do a collage of cut out magazine photos, or seed catalogue flowers or pictures of saints, Gods and Goddesses."
Goddesses? Did I miss that verse?
OMFG!!!!!!!!!!????!!!!!!!!
AWWSOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DEUS EX FLASHINA!!!!!!!!
I liked it. Reminded me of Bear McCreary.
More and more I think mainstream religion is becoming more of a support group for the culturally unaware, tone-deaf, kitsch-loving, "Precious Moments"-collecting crowd than an actual expression of faith. Why don't they just join a knitting club and abandon all this ugly "crucifixion" stuff?
Seriously. I think "God Box" making types would be just as happy at a knick-knack expo as at a church service, and the religious guys already have sports bars for their social interaction needs. Why do they need churches and preachers guiding their lives when all that's really making them happy is the hobby aspect?
Nothing was better than the day my mom took up gardening. All the "maybe we should go to church today" talk on Sundays completely disappeared, and she stopped quoting "The Purpose Driven Life" at me. She thinks more about how to attract colorful birds to her backyard than about Gawd these days, and she's happier than I've seen her in my entire life. All these "religion makes my life more enjoyable" people are LYING. They just like getting together and chatting while making horrible arts and crafts projects. I just wish they'd realize it...
I do, if you click the link to my name and look through my sculptures you'll find one of a suspension. Simple definition is being hung in the air by hooks through your skin. Not something I've done though I'd like to try it sometime.
Church of Body Mod is not a serious church, meaning members are serious about the body modification part but not the church part.
Clearly the ICCM folks have been taking advice from true masters of web design.
It's like seeing inside a Christian's head ... scary.
arkonbey #52
"Actually, it's something one might design if one were mocking a religious group, not advertising it."
Too true. I also suspect subversion by whoever promoted Teabagging and 2M4M to the Hindrocket Postulate.
If I wanted to make a website for the Church of the New World Order (complete with AntiChrist) -- that is what it would look like. It's the prelude to Armageddon.
All hail the Illuminati!
#82- Noadi, I LOVE your Etsy shop! I've looked around there many times, and I think I've added it to my favorites. Small world.
Holy shit, that woke me up. Reminded me of those destruction derby ads, "Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!"
Michael Leal #78 wrote:
The "God Box" site is not Christian: it's New Age, combining Christian elements with distortions of Hinduism, Taoism, neo-paganism, and a mess of ecumenical, tolerant, "take what you need and leave the rest" high-woo nonsense.
Her mentor is Sister Judith, of which we may read:
"May our glowing faith in the inherent divinity of every human being
and the ultimate unity of all life be of tremendous value to all people
in the quest for truth and the full flowering of our human potential."
Quick! A bucke -- a box!
To me, this (and the mentioned Evangelical megachurch sacred pop-crap) is only further proof that religious art is just another form of art. It follows the zeitgeist and adapts to its society just as much as other art, rather than being inspired by something special and distinguishing itself from other forms of art.
I always like to think of the Bible as a kind of "model organism" for art, especially music... I should write a blog article about this, but haven't found the time up to now.
The local news has a scathing review of our Miss La Jolla/Miss California's performance.
----------
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/entertainment/Miss-California-Goes-Craz…
"By having to answer that question in front of a national audience, God [through Perez Hilton?!?!] was testing my character and faith," Prejean said. "I'm glad I stayed true to myself."
We're curious -- if the Q&A was a test of faith, what's the bikini competition for?
----------
[Brackets mine.]
Why would any sane person want a puppy?
(Or, indeed, a "God box", though I think I'd rather have one of those than a puppy. Equally pointless, but less expensive and less destructive.)
Um, maybe crystal meth?
Speaking of god boxes: probably my favourite aspect of early Judaism is the Ark of the Covenant, kept the Holy of Holies in the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. It contained three things: the two stone tablets on which were written the Ten Commandments, and YHWH himself.
I love that so much. The ancient Jews literally kept their god in a box! It's such a sensible place to keep a god, I don't know why all religions don't institute a similar policy.
Why don't you ask one? Then you'd have a sample of one, which is more than you have now. (You could also ask why sane people might want to have sex while you're doing the survey.)
;)
Well. Thanks to that first link, my eyes will never be the same again...just the antidote I needed for baking sugar cookies for Earth Day tomorrow (don't ask).
The Church of Body Modification was interesting, but nothing I haven't seen on Body Modification Extreme's site. It is surprising just how much weirder a piercing can be when you make it about your religion.
Indeed, I'd be rather disconcerted if they were having sex while I was doing the survey. :-)
Raze/#21: The Church of Body Modification makes a lot more sense now; thanks for that. I should be more patient and read past the first dozen posts...
This explains so much about you Walton... or rather... it doesn't. It just reinforces a lot.
Seriously mate, you need to get out and experience life a bit more. You seem like one sad dude.
I was just waiting for an X-Wing to blast the shit out of their logo at some point of that intro.
The godbox reminds me of a line from Christopher Titus:
Even though I totally agree with arkonbey, let's not forget who the target audience is here, and what message the message for them is. You're obviously off your rocks anyway if you believe in this religious nonsense, and face it, we don't (and probably wouldn't want to) understand the mind of the people peddling this and the people receiving it. Also, it looks like all of the clients of sharperfx have the same message and target audience. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". A POE website for them would be just the way it is now...
Holy crap, I thought it was the prelude to the Rapture! Religion can be as dramatic with all sorts of exploding graphics, but in the end it is still insane nonsense.
Just a slight disagreeament PZ:
Religion didn't give us Bach and Michelangelo et al; we can thank evolution for their musical and painting genius, and only regard religion as the expression of the time. I had a feeling you did not intend for it to be expressed that way, but either way, your intent was forthright and meaningful.
Here's another one: http://www.sharperfx.com/nb/
X-TREME!
What a cheesy (macaroni and cheesy?) ripoff of various traditions such as Native American medicine bags.
Who, as a kid, didn't decorate a secret shoe or cigar box in which one kept various cool stuff like rocks, Star Wars action figures, and other things meaningful only to a kid?
Wow, too much coffee and too many video games. With the droning loop of music, it reminded me of the intro to a role-playing-game. Medieval, Dungeons and Dragons like. Somehow, it seems thoroughly appropriate.
I kind of liked the godboxes. Artsy.
The ICCM page gave me acid flashbacks, and I've never done acid.
I'd guess you are disconcerted 24/7 Walton.
This must be rerun tard day on Pharyngula. Heddle on one thread and Walton here.
A subliminal flash site for religious body modification.
Might keep some of them from breeding like rabbits. Somebody get on that, toute suite.
I hate my name being taken in vain, but I enjoyed this bit: The teacher known as Judith says: "My God box calls to me. My God box is ever ready to receive my needs. If I forget to ask for miracles, it wonders why I don't use it more often. It patiently awaits my heart vibrations”.
Sounds like George Carlin talking about the 4th word you can't say on television.
Holbach (103)- Religion gave us Bach & Michelangelo, because that's where the money to support artists came from. While it is probable that they could have found secular patrons, it is also possible that they would have been much less prolific or their work lost to time.
There is something very fake about that god box.....
Where is Lifto, now that we really need him?
daveau @ 111
That is what I inferred when I wrote that religion was the expression of the time. I saved much explanation and historical fact when I couched it in that manner.
Look on the bright side. At least they wreren't all flat-earth'y with it.
I see your stash box, and raise you my stash panties.
It's easy to do just follow these steps
1: You cut a hole in the box...
2: You stick your dick in the box
3: When Jimmy the altar boy expresses interest in your glitter and macaroni covered God Box you let him open the box
It's my dick in a box!
And Re: the ICCM website, never before has the iconic
[Announcer Voice]
"This SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY!!"
[/Announcer Voice]
been more apt.
Daft Greg @72:
Your link nearly killed me. The crucifix-generated laser fire! And what is that kokpelli dude on the left doing to the cross?
... or Renaissance poster art.
Michelangelo's homages to Peter Max are considered classic, but I've always had a fetish about the da Vinci flyers for Grateful Dead concerts at Fillmore Florence.
Holbach@114
Upon clarification, I agree with your assessment. I was overly focusing on what gave Bach, et al., to us in the 21st century, not how that genius came to be.
Redbull gives you wings!!!
Daft Greg @ 72
Man, getting the mind around that mishmash is headache inducing! "Souls Are Dying?" I thought souls could not die? Leave it to religion to give us a dual meaning.
If you venture on to ICCM's welcome page you learn that
So they're a tax dodge too? No surprise here. Ever seen a poorly dressed evangelical priest?
Speaking of flash abuse, I found this just now through Reddit:
http://www.sharperfx.com/kkmime/index3.htm
I didn't think it could be done, but that first link outdid Time Cube in sheer awfulness of web design. I'd take 100-point, all caps, multicolored font over that mess any day. They broke pretty much every rule of web accessibility, web design guidelines, and browser etiquette I can think of. (Well, short of generating thousands of popups and alert boxes.)
Holbach - In one area of the Sistine chapel is a portrait of god flying around heaven. Which is rather common, but this one is unique. God is flying away from the viewer, looking back, with his night shirt flapping about and a completely bare backside!
What a lovely message to the pope and his followers. :D
Ok you can't fool me, this ICCM flash is a Terry Gilliam production yes?
The two greatest homages to God's all-powerful tackiness must be this and The Meaning of Life.
And once again, Walton tries to impress us with his lack of an actual life.
Holy crap on a stick, Walton! Is your world so completely fucked up that puppies cause that reaction? Get some help. Even people who hate dogs and only like cats have been known to like puppies. Were you sodomized by a puppy in an earlier life?
Therapy. And medication, if they recommend it. Seriously, dude. Damn.
Playing in the yard with my puppy on Sundays when the god botherers stop by to do some innocent bystander bothering is quite fun. I listen patiently while petting my dog and throwing a ball or Frisbee for him to catch and they tell me (very unconvincingly, btw) how I need gawd and jebus in my life. Me and the dog just having a bit of fun and enjoying life while the overly dressed morons go on and on about their imaginary friends and how being indoors on Sunday morning is somehow 'better' than enjoying the day with a super cool dog. Even 'accidentally' splattering paint on them from up on the ladder while re-painting the side of the house wasn't nearly as much fun as playing with the dog while they tried their lame-ass spiel.
Either that or you're pulling our leg and doing a poor job of it at that. Eating puppies, that I can understand. Puppies and babies, stir fry, extra spicy. Steamed rice please and hot and sour soup. No MSG, please.
P.S. God wants macaroni pictures.
I've got to say, if you ask me, this whole "religion gave us Bach" business is a little bit overblown. Yes, J.S. Bach was very religious, wrote church music and worked in chapels. However, he worked in the chapels of dukes, princes, at schools.... Government jobs, mostly. Yes, it was theocratic feudalistic government, but still government. Basically it was just sucking the teats of the aristocrats, who themselves were sucking the marrow out of the religious commoners.
Besides, even though I love much of Bach's music, a lot of it wasn't terribly original. I know, I know, it's all very shocking... One more thing: if you've actually listened to any church music in the past century, you'd realize they've all but given up their support of decent new art and music.
WRMartin - *Snicker* Yep, Walton keeps proving that he does not improve with age. Rather than having a poker up the backside, I'm beginning to suspect he has a #9 coal scoop shovel. :p
Ouch! Look up the intro, and the credits go to sharperfx dot com. Don't go there. Really.
A god box is useless if you have a puppy, but if you are a cat person it might make a fine litter box.
LOL, that was the most hysterical thing I've seen in a long time.
On that I agree with you. I don't think I've ever heard a decent hymn that was written after 1900.
Malimar @ 94
I would love to read up on the Jews keeping ol' YHWH in a box, got any interesting articles? :-D
Davem@130, I'm sorry dude, you were right. I went there. I went there and I found amid the glistening, whooshing, whirring, flashing examples: K&K, THE CHRISTIAN MIMES!!!!!!
http://www.sharperfx.com/kkmime/index3.htm
Is this like dick-in-a-box?
As an atheist body-modder, I am offended and disappointed.
Re Bach;
I do remember Douglas Adams having good things to say about him in the Dirk Gently stories. To classical music in general, my response is;
"Fugue, and the Horst you rode in on!"
WARNING! Contains baby killing opera and life destroying wooo!
I was always under the impression, apparently mistaken, that xtians frowned on abuse of crystal meth. Maybe its that Red-state connection thing....
Compositionalist @ 128
Good backup to my comment at 103. I love J S Bach and his sons, and the locus is on J S himself as one of the greatest composers of all time. Now that I have confirmed his place in my regard, let me say that as an atheist I do not listen to any religious music of any composer, even the great Bach. Too many people think of Bach as just a composer of religious music such as te deums, masses missa solemis, but seem to be unaware of his secular music. These include the great Concerti Grossi, the English and French Suites, many other piano pieces, and chamber music for various instruments. He may have composed for the religious dolts who ruled during his time, but he also composed great music with no religious overtones or references. He was not completely swayed or intimidated by the religious hierarchy. This is the Baroque Period of Music, and there were many more composers who wrote religious music but also much secular music. So the period was not completely devoid of secular genius even though much influenced by the dark age mentality of stultifying religion.
Which is one of the reasons I love Jazz, a musical genre noted for it's scant reference to religion, but also because it is one of the best types of music, in my opinion, to effect me to my core. I am speaking specifically of the Jazz and Popular Music of the 1920's and 1930's, also the 1940's and into the early 1950's with reservations, and that of bebop and modern jazz. All music before my time and of which I am glad to have latched onto.
Other flash abuse on churches website:
http://www.evangelcathedral.net/
(This one contains evangelical mimes!)
http://www.sharperfx.com/kkmime/index3.htm
http://www.sjmbc.org/index2.htm
I'm sure Walton and Pete Rooke will love it.
My god box is empty.
Mike in SD @ # 91: The local news has a scathing review of our Miss La Jolla/Miss California's performance.
That's such a hatchet job I could (in this one case) agree with Prejean & her pals that the media persecutes hyperchristians.
For a "mainstream" corporate media venue to fling a barrage of overripe tomatoes to a bible-banger implies that San Diego has come a long way since hosting the Repub Natl Convention in '96.
Whatever happened, I hope they franchise it nationally.
@ #72
That site is awesome. I loved seeing information on 'Angelology' in the corner. You know what, screw biochemistry I want to be an Angelologist! Perhaps then I could learn some of the deep misteries of life such as why crosses shoot vitamin supplements.
Crudely Wrott @ # 122: Ever seen a poorly dressed evangelical priest?
Not sure I've seen one in any garb, depending on how you define those two ecclesiastical positions.
If you mean any evangelical pro of whatever denomination, sure. Just about every small town has a few, also-rans in the minor leagues of their game.
Could anyone else envision a long-haired taurine-laden cubicle dweller furiously muttering "Drag frames for Christ!! Drag frames for Christ!!!" while that intro was playing? That, or some second year graphic design student is trying his damndest to impress whatever first employer he can find by blowing them away with even the smallest intricacies (that are entirely misplaced and misapplied). I remember when I was such a person that thought every web design project was another opportunity to create the Internet's Mona Lisa. That notion had rubbed off completely by the second year.
With an intro and information design like that, this person probably got paid to the tune of $100/hour to produce that. And yes, it does ultimately make the client look stupid. You can't possibly take the business seriously after that Bruckheimer intro.
@Holbach, what a shame... you're cutting yourself out of a lot of music. I have more than a dozen requiems, including several from the 20th century, such as Penderecki's Polish Requiem, Schnittke's Requiem, and even Balada's Agnostic's Requiem. Add Stravinsky's Requiem Canticles and you have four great 20th-century works from people not conventionally religious. Or, Brahms' Ein Deutsches Requiem, from someone who was some sort of Deist, probably.
And, plenty of great conductors without a lick of religious leanings swing the stick to lead these great works.
This flash needs that warning they play before all Japanese anime shows now. Super Seizure Robots!
Varlo @ #131: if you have a puppy, it will make a nice chew-toy... like anything else that will stay still long enough. Just remember to use edible glue on your string ornaments.
The best Flash has to offer: the Skip Intro figgin' button!
Socratic Gadfly: yes, and also choristers with not a lick of religious leanings to sing them! Why we would have to, I really don't follow. It's art, it's performance. No-one suspects a soprano of actually dying of TB when she sings Mimi.
Other 20th century and 21st century composers worth noting: Ralph Vaughan Williams, Benjamin Britten, Arvo Pärt, Henryk Górecki. All wrote/write some stunningly gorgeous religious music. It's part of the classical art music idiom.
I immediately clicked on the link, expecting Safari to "quit unexpectedly". No, it just froze.
Then I went home and clicked again, using Internet Explorer 7. And each time I threatened to stop laughing, something hilarious happened and kept me going... :-D I could watch this kind of shit for hours, were it not for the fact that the pain in the jaw joints would become unbearable after maybe 10 to 20 minutes. :-D :-D :-D
Interestingly, my blood pressure is very low. But I've recently trained to play Minesweeper when very tired. Maybe that allowed me to keep up with that hyperthyroidic flash abuse.
Calling unto the name of Batman is entirely appropriate. What jokers! :-D
Yep, and they read that all aloud. First all those letters that zoom around and spin like ultracentrifuges, and then they think their visitors are illiterate? LOL!
No, all continents are in there twice: once plain, and once in white and to the east of the plain version.
Wow. I'm the 16th biggest moron ever. Who'd'a' thunk.
ROTFL!
SocraticGadfly @ 148
You just don't seem to get it, with that defense of religious music and my seemingly voided life without it. I have much music in my collection, and not one piece of religious composition. How am I missing out on a lot of music if that music represents what I don't like? You make it sound as if that is the only music worth listening to, and all other is just incidental. Is your mind saturated with this stuff to the point that secular music comes in second, if at all? I don't miss anything if that something is what I consider not worth the composition or my attention. I am sure there are types of music you do not care for, but why, and do explain so in the manner which I have explained. I would rather listen to and be enthralled by Bix Beiderbecke playing "Clementine From New Orleans" which describes a certain female from a real city, than to listen to a religious composition glorifying an imaginary thing. The music is secondary in this case, and if it were glorifying cloud formations which no doubt are real, then I would most definitely like the piece as worth my attention. Can you at all comprehend and realize that it is not just the music behind the composition but the subject of it?
Putting the LOL in Angelology.
"One more thing: if you've actually listened to any church music in the past century, you'd realize they've all but given up their support of decent new art and music."
"On that I agree with you. I don't think I've ever heard a decent hymn that was written after 1900."
You might give a listen to Benjamin Britten's "War Requiem", composed in the 1960s for the rededication of Coventry Cathedral, which had been rebuilt after being bombed almost into complete rubble during WW2. Pretty damn powerful. It's not a "hymn", but it's certainly religious, and full of deep, human feeling for all that had been lost.
I don't think you can entirely separate the inborn abilities of geniuses like Michelangelo or Bach from the social matrices they worked within, when "accounting" for their accomplishments. If either of them had been born into extreme poverty in a time period with much less use for their kind of talent (like, say the Dark Ages), or had been women... need I say more? For instance, there have been and are human cultures that give little or no scope for representational visual artistic expression, like that of traditional Bedouins.
There's no point in trying to minimize or discount the power of organized European Christianity to (1) provide complex themes that were intelligible and important to the majority of potential viewers, and (2)sustain a wealthy class of society who were capable of supporting artists of many kinds. It was all intertwined, a package deal.
Bach and Michelangelo and Leonardo and Raphael and El Greco and Mozart and Vivaldi and Scarlatti and all the rest of 'em, were vastly gifted by evolution and heredity - AND they were Christians who expressed their religious feelings and beliefs (among other thoughts and feelings) thru their art - - AND they lived in times and places that were able and willing to support them.
Holbach @154 - no tom waits in your collection? chocolate jesus is amazing. now that's religious music!
That Flash intro seems more appropriate for Team America (Fuck Yeah!) than the International Congress of Churches and Ministers.
ICCM's intro is even more funny when you read their "fundamental truths" (i.e. their statement of faith, which all Christian organizations are required by God to post on their websites):
If there were a Flash developer equivalent to speaking in tongues, that intro might count.
@ Holbach... I never said it was the only music worth listening to. I just said you're impoverishing your musical world if you cut yourself away from that music, IMO, and Cath agrees, having understood what I'm saying. And, I use the "impoverishing" because you said you reject it because it's religious, not because of the particular composer, style, etc.
That said, as an antitheist myself (thanks, Hitch, for adding that to the vocabulary), I can appreciate the religious impulse that gave rise to that music without believing it.
But, without even "appreciating" the religious impulse behind a requiem, or the B minor, I could appreciate it as great music, which it is.
Or, other things to appreciate. Schnittke "smuggled" a requiem into incidental music for Don Carlos... the only way he could get a requiem played in the Soviet Union. So, because it's a requiem, you'd reject it. And not appreciate everything else connected with its history.
OK, Holbach, something else.
Do you listen to Rachmaninov? Since just about every major piece of his has the Dies Irae running through it somewhere, if you're logically consistent, you must stop listening to it.
Or "secular" music that Bach recycled from motets, etc. If you know it came from a motet, you should stop listening to it.
Or, to go off religion entirely. "Deutschland uber alles" was written by Haydn. It was perfectly fine on its own, including as the Austrian imperial anthem, before being associated with the Nazis. Do I not listen to it? Of course not.
Lil Innocent @ 156
Yes, Mozart, Vivaldi, Scarlatti and all the rest of them composed religious music. But not all their compositions were religious. See the point?
Also, did you see the link to "Warrior Bride" on the sidebar? It seems to be the side project of ICCM's founder's wife, Deborah Chitwood. The site consists mostly of a PDF flyer, so here's some quotes if you don't want to dl it:
The Chitwoods are a very melodramatic family.
That you're a nutball?
I think of Holbach as the resident atheist mutawwa :)
SC @ 163
Kind of harsh and a little off kelter when the subject is probably beyond your ken. Do you equivocate a distaste for a certain musical composition with being a nutball? Are you serious or just a little laxing in something smart to say?
Holbach, that was me at 160. Sorry.
Is it just Christian-based religious music you dislike. I've got "classical" Jewish music for both Hanukkah and Yom Kippur. Great stuff. And religious as well as non-religious klezmer music, getting to your jazz alley. So, is that verboten, too?
And LOL at John Morales.
Ok, another one: ICCM School of Ministry (kind of a DeVry for the crazy tongue-speaking set.)
I like how Michael Chitwood (ICCM's founder) gave himself the title of "General Overseer". It's vague, yet much more oppressive sounding than "dean" or "provost". I imagine whips are involved. He also has "THE AUTHORITY" (quotes theirs) next to his picture, which is too perfect.
The school's curriculum consists of: Spiritual Warfare, Prayer, Miracles, Fasting (I can imagine how much this saves them on the campus cafeteria budget), and Anointing.
They also have a Preacher's Academy aimed at the 16-21 age group. I wonder if you get that "Great Generals in the Army of God" page as a poster if you enroll? It seems like the sort of thing that kid on the second page would have hanging in his bedroom.
I majored in art history, specializing in the social and political history of art (including Medieval and Renaissance art). It's beyond your fucking ken. I've read your comments on numerous threads about religious art and music, and they are frankly insane. You don't know anything about these people, people, what they were up against or how they expressed and shared their humanity through religious (or "religious") works.
Couple more for Holbach:
1. Bach when at Calvinist Cothen wrote primarily secular music because he was at a Calvinist court, but moved on. It seems reasonable that, to some degree, he WANTED to write religious music.
2. Assuming Bach's music can be separated from his inspiration is specious. Bach might be just as religious, were he alive today. Or, if put into an irreligious culture, say the Soviet Union, and raised by irreligious parents, he might be less of a composer, even with going to conservatory, etc. He might be just as good, or better. But, we don't know whether religion gave us Michelangelo and Bach or not. Given that Michelangelo was gay, and religiously irreverent in his works where possible, you could make an argument religion didn't give us him. You have a far tougher argument, empirically, on Bach.
Oh boy! Walton showing teh puppy hate, and Holbach tossing malapropisms at SC. I’m making some popcorn and mixing a drink. This should be hilarious.
@ Holbach and SC... I minored in music, and would venture I have a much larger classical music library than Holbach. I also have a graduate divinity degree -- from a Lutheran seminary -- and likely know a hell of a lot more about Bach and his religiosity than you.
@ Grendel's Dad... so, don't cut me out of a sidebar on this issue.
SC @ 168
The subject is Music, not art as you ranted about. Do you know the fucking difference? What is insane about my comments on relgious art and music is your fucking interpretation of my comments. Majoring in something does not mean you have a deep appreciation in that subject. Your numerous comments also leaves a doubt about your grasp of many things. The "OM" in your post stands for "Occupationally Mordant".
One last one: I get what their "prayer request" is, but what the Holy Bible is a "Praise Report"?
Are we supposed to report on things that we feel are praise worthy in general, like kittens or the glory of a sunset? Are we recommending that praise be given to someone, like someone in the community who did good by converting a heathen or whatever? Are we reporting that we gave praise? Shouldn't, according to their beliefs, every praise report just say "Praise God"?
Should the Pharyngula horde start filling out reports or would that just be mean?
Oh I'm not cutting anyone out. I fully expect fireworks from so many directions it may resemble that freaky flashterbation.
@ Holbach... then your name stands for...
Hugely Obnoxious Little-minded Belitter of Artistry of Churchgoing Hominids?
If you want to switch from music to wordplay...
Oh, and since PZ DID mention Michelangelo AND Bach, the topic started as both art and music.
Music is an art form, jackass. And as I said you've made parallel comments about visual art on numerous occasions. Are you denying this?
Yeah, right.
Yes, it pretty much does, especially when combined with subsequent years of independent study.
Oh, be more vague.
Bizarre. You know what it stands for. And it wasn't in my post.
Holbach:
Wait, is music not art? And why is it capitalised?
I sniff religious overtones here!
</mockery>
SocraticGadfly @ 175
Thanks for the moniker; I won't dispute the obvious.
True, but I confined my comments to religious music, not art, and stuck to it in successive comments, and even though I love art as well as music, my comments on this post were about music. Art is another topic better left out of this discussion for now.
The "god box" sounds like the tackiest piece of crap ever. Strings soaked in glue, I ask you. What a disgusting excuse for a craft.
Except that he's made precisely the same sorts of comments about visual art. Why the hell would he even deny it?
@ Holbach 178... kudos for honesty on the moniker. Still curious your thoughts on non-Christian religious music, or any/all of Rachmaninov with the Dies Irae theme.
To me, that deepens the value of the music. Why did he use that theme so much, not being Catholic, or Protestant? (Beyond the fact of getting the theme via Tchaikovsky.)
Art (yes, H, including music) is one of maybe four general accomplishments of Homo sapiens, the others being science, technology, and, arguably, philosophy. Who gives a shit what "inspired" an artwork? It is, independent of the artist(s)'s inspiration, and can be experienced on its own terms in the present.
John Morales @ 177
Wait, is Architecture not art? I have the habit of capitalizing those subjects which are of special interest to me. If you notice, I always capitalize Astronomy, as it is one of my favorite subjects.
Your mockery is understood and accepted in deference to a former post to which I inferred religious overtones on your part. Touche.
Or non-Christian religious visual art, which together encompass the vast majority of art throughout human history.
How about some of the Central American art found by archeologists? In the absence of any knowledge about the motives and influences of the artist, can H place any value on the art?
SC @ 180
I made the same disparaging remarks about religious art as I did here on religious music, but that was some time ago on another thread. Where the hell did I deny this? I did not, but the subject happened to be religious music and this is what I stuck to. That first sentence confirms my distaste and is obvious not a denial.
@ SC 184 and @ John Morales 177 and @ Holbach 183.
Yes. Especially since architecture is indeed art, and per PZ's initial line, this gets us back to not just the murals on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, but to the Sistine Chapel itself.
So, Holbach, is Chartes not a work of art? Either the cathedral itself, or individual items like its stained glass?
@ Grendel's Dad: Of course Holbach can, because he'll make an assumption about the religious background, just as he's assumed you can separate Bach's music, musical motivation, etc., from his religion. Which you can't.
So, Holbach, on Bach's manuscripts, "SDG" stand for:
A. Soli Deo Gloria
B. Suck Dick Girls
C. Solipsism Does Good
going back to another wonderfully obtuse post from Walton...
Why would anyone want a puppy?
Bacon.
that is all.
The Anti-Holbach @ 182
Good grief, am I that controversial to have a moniker in opposition named against me?
Your last sentence sums up the gist of the matter. Are you going to deny me the right to not experience art on its own terms according to my distaste for the subject matter? Am I not to apply the same evaluation on other subjects that do not appeal to me for whatever reason?
Actually, more than one, I believe.
Um:
I'm at a loss as to why you would be so emphatic about making this distinction if you're not implying that your attitude about religious visual art differs meaningfully from your attitude about religious music. You just said that you made the "same disparaging [idiotic] remarks" about visual art in the past as you're making here about music. So is there any difference there? If so, what is it? If not, what the fuck is your point with these comments?
So, Holbach, on Bach's manuscripts, "SDG" stand for:
I'm not sure that's a good argument, in and of itself.
I can be contracted to do work that I personally have no stake in whatsoever.
The title of the work has fuck all to do with its actually motivation in the creation of it.
In fact, I'd say I could just as well argue that money is as much a motivator as god in producing works of art or music.
The artist themselves would have to define their own motivations in order for any observing their work to know for sure.
even then... I think back to Salvador Dali.
what a scamp.
actually->actual.
sigh
can I blame it on the Rev?
I don’t know Socraticgadfly, I suspect he would be more likely to make a value judgment according to his tastes now (pretty much as anyone would), but that judgment might change if later excavations showed a religious connection to a piece he had admired.
That willingness to change in light of new evidence is admirable in matters of knowledge. It just strikes me as odd in matters of taste.
@ Holbach 190...
Survey sez...
YES!
Longer answer...
We can't "deny" you anything. We can, though, point out fallacious reasoning, including making judgments without empirical evidence, as you've done on this thread, i.e., whether religious belief is separable from the subject in cases such as Buch.
We can't "deny" you anything, part two. The old "de gustibus non disputandum." We can point out, though, that even from the point of view of other secularists, irreligious, antitheists, atheists, etc., ... the reason you arrive at these tastes is narrow-minded artistically at best, philistine at not so best, and borderline, or not so borderline, nutbar at worst.
Or, to use an old phrase.. this is "village idiot atheism." But, even the atheist village needs one or two, I guess.
Holy crap. The first link looks like a video game intro.
I always thought SDG stood for Sounds Damn Good...
SocraticGadfly @ 181
I like Rachmaninov and have his piano concertos, symphonies, solo piano music, and chamber music. But no religious works. Damn, that's a lot, and even without the religious stuff.
Majoring in something does not mean you have a deep appreciation in that subject
I suppose one could major in something and fail so badly as to not even get a degree in it, but otherwise...
I rather thought that WAS the point (at least the major point ;) ) of majoring in something.
Ichthyic @ 192.. but, Bach WANTED to write religious music when "stuck" at a Calvinist court, and eventually left there. That's why my highly irreverent quiz is relevant, IMO.
Bach wasn't like Mozart in other words, with Mozart taking the Archbishop of Salzburg's money because he had plenty of it.
Bach WANTED to write religious music, and he wrote some stuff that's damn good music, with religious text.
@ 48,
Think meathooks in your shoulders.
The faith of body mod truly had me shake my head in wonderment.I mean,that stuff out there,but to make it a church??And what faith do you need when youre hanging suspended from a ceiling? That you wont fall,or that the hooks wont rip out?
@ Holbach 198... But, I told you that almost all of his works have an explicitly religious tune in them. Anybody from the Western world who knows a certain amount about religious music knows the Dies Irae. I think you need to throw all your Rachmaninov music away. Because I've told you its religious background, even if you didn't know it before.
Woohoo! That ICCM site has me all fired up for some Speedball
Shame that it is meant to be a churchy website.
I didn't have sound on here, so I'm disappointed to read in these comments that it just had a cheesy music loop. My imagination had provided all the exciting "Woosh! Pzow! Clank, clank, clank...BANG! Bzzat, bzzat!" noises that it so clearly needs.
I didn't go into the site, anything would have to be a let down after that...
@ Holbach on literature:
So, is Eliot's "The Four Quartets," or other post-conversion poetry, not poetic because it has explicit biblical references, although not quoting the bible word for word?
Ditto for other poetry of his of similar quality.
Or, Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address? Is it not sublime because of its religious references?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK4Bh_arF-E
(BTW, The Dali museums are great.)
Assuming Bach's music can be separated from his inspiration is specious.
hmm.
be careful with that.
try this on for size:
Assuming X's (substitute any particular scientist who claims to be religious, like Miller) science can be separated from his inspiration is specious.
might be true; but it's not an easy call to make. From from specious to make the opposing argument, in any case.
Compartmentalization isn't a perfect solution, but we all do it, and it does work most times. Of course, when it doesn't, one often goes nuts like Michael Egnor.
In fact, I'll one up Miller and give you Jonathan Wells as a counter example.
EVERYONE knew what his motivations were in going for an advanced degree at Berkeley, but it didn't stop him from managing to complete his degree and publishing work to get it that was not obviously motivated by his ideology.
just to show that indeed, people can separate their motivations from their work.
of course, as soon as he GOT the degree, then he was entirely free to become the complete demented fucktard we all know and "love".
Bah, href FAIL
Speedball
SC, OM, SocraticGadfly
You both sound like connoisseurs of fine tobacco and cotton. Y'know, the good stuff, that was picked by all those slaves.
You may want to appreciate it as just art or music, but it is not ethical to ignore the very real suffering of those victims of who the art and music was made to glorify.
If as I do, Holbach chooses to mark that suffering and show solidarity, buy eschewing and dismissing the products of their oppression, that is a moral choice. And one I would encourage others to make.
@Ichthyic and SC...
Dali was god, even more than money (tho that was a very close second) to Dali.
As for his greatness, I'm of about half a dozen minds about Dali at the same time. Some part of me thinks he was great, some part thinks he was a craptacular schlockmeister (PZ, could you imaging Dali with the Internet and Flash? We'd be blind from his websites), another part thinks he was great precisely because he was a scholckmeister, part of me isn't even sure he was an artist. Besides, most stuff after 1960, and a fair amount after 1950, even, isn't "his" anyway.
BTW, The Dali museums are great
I wish I could say I've managed to visit one.
:(
Always been a fan from afar, since I first saw his work in high school and was taught how to "analyze" it for themes and meaning (we had a very "unique" english teacher); read many books and biographies on his life and history since.
another part thinks he was great precisely because he was a scholckmeister, part of me isn't even sure he was an artist.
oh, he was an artist all right. He just had a ... unique ... agenda.
I sometimes think he was the ultimate reactionary genius.
SC @205, I couldn't help but notice that that link was submitted by 'espermascontracacas'.
Eddie @ 208 -- WTF? Bach wasn't a slave, tho non-religious picking were slim for employment. I've already said more than once he went from a Calvinist boss who didn't hire him to write religious music back to a Lutheran boss who did.
You also ignore 20th/21st century composers who write religious music ... and it's damned good music. Rachmaninov's Vespers comes immediately to mind. Or Stravinsky's Symphony of Psalms or Threni. None of them was "enslaved" at all. They all were in the modern free world.
In fact, Eddie, your argument, especially with the PC-like "oppression" theme, is so lame, I'm going to save myself the wait...
and...
Call you a fucking idiot right now.
Think meathooks in your shoulders.
ahh, brings back memories...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z829cL9spho
I don’t know, eddie, it seems you are mixing two different categories here. It is a moral choice to avoid or even criticize something for the suffering it causes, but its aesthetic value still seems like a separate issue to me.
Ichthyic @ 206... I stand by what I said, on Bach going back to work for a Lutheran composer. In his case at least, he wanted to write religious music. That's why I also stand by the analogy that the only reasonable way to make this non-specious would be to revive him and plunk him in the Stalinist USSR or something.
Also, specific to your argument... that's one area where I don't think you can analogize from the sciences to the arts very well. Nobody other than a creationist/IDer, or a Scientologist, claims to do "religious science."
What the fuck are you talking about? I'm including aboriginal Australian, aboriginal American, ancient Indian, African, and every other kind of art here. As I said, I specialized in the social and political history of art. This is a history of inequality and struggle. (As I've said here in the past, you'll never look at a medieval cathedral again when you've read a Marxist history of its construction.) I don't forget for a second the matrices of power and privilege in which art is produced. But this includes all art - there's nothing specific to "religious" art here. It helps to see artists in their social context and understand what they were up against. Total red herring.
*Incidentally, many members of my family and some of my friends picked tobacco. The only reason I didn't was that my father wouldn't allow it.
Bach WANTED to write religious music, and he wrote some stuff that's damn good music, with religious text.
hmm, I think you kinda missed my point.
maybe 206 clarifies it a bit more?
"Think meathooks in your shoulders."
I thought it was meathooks in your pecs. Ever seen the movie A Man Called Horse?
An american religious ritual. One older than the bod mods may know, even.
Bummer, I read all this way hoping to see some tasty Thomas Kinkaid bashing. So here goes!
I'd rather watch 20 minutes of that flash animation than have my visual cortrex tainted by even a glimpse of that douche bag's "art" ever again. He's worse that the oil-on-velvet Jesus over an 18-wheeler I used to own.
...
Which led to the worst comic strip evar!!1!1!
Uh: (As I've said here in the past, you'll never look at a medieval cathedral the same way again when you've read a Marxist history of its construction.)
Nobody other than a creationist/IDer, or a Scientologist, claims to do "religious science."
Still not sure I'm being clear.
Let me go back to the counter-example of Jonathan Wells, who claimed the exact opposite: to have done NON-religious science when his motivations for doing so we transparently religious.
I'm not saying Bach in specific was a case of motivations separate from work, but what I AM saying is that the argument of motivations is not that clear cut in general IMO.
Is that any clearer?
The only reason I didn't was that my father wouldn't allow it.
...thus depriving you of a good fall-back career.
;P
Ichthyic @ 218... no, I saw it... see my 216 and analogizing across disciplines, etc. I don't think I missed your point, but let me try a different angle.
Maybe "specious" was a bit too harsh. I do think that Holbach's argument (and, where the hell did he go... he's dropped out) is logically invalid, based on the empirical counterevidence I offer. Now, Bach may have gone back to a Lutheran employer for a variety of reasons. But, beyond motets and other Sunday "ordinary" music, he started writing more other religious music once he made the move.
And, he stayed at Leipzig for more than 25 years after leaving Cothen. So, there's good evidence the move was made in part for religious reasons.
So, in commenting to a generic person, perhaps "specious" would be too strong, if not the wrong word entirely.
But, arguably, in light of this discussion, and Holbach... "specious" is the right word.
Ichthyic @ 223... yes, clearer now.
You were speaking to the general, but I was, and am, speaking to the specific example of Bach. And, as Bach's religiosity and musical influence thereof is perhaps contra-example No. 1 to Holbach, that's why I have focused on Bach as the specific.
Sadly, you're not kidding! :P (Also, more seriously and perhaps sadly, of knowledge that would be helpful to me now. Though he was probably right...)
I suspect socraticGadfly watched The Good The Bad and The Ugly and thought; "my, how wonderful the music they play in that prison camp".
I doubt s/he even understands the reference.
Eddie, again, you make no fucking sense.
Even if you think religion was a "prison" in Bach's age, it's not today in a secular free society for composers who choose to compose religious music.
And, since I'm not the only person to say WTF back to your first comment, it's a lot more likely that you're short in the brain cells than I am.
fair enough.
It's not so much I was attacking the specific case, as I wanted to attack generalizing it as a tangent to the main discourse, so I think we're on the same page. In fact, thinking again of Jonathan Wells, It's possible that MY motivation in even bringing it up was to simply admonish that it's not enough to look at someone's work by itself to garner what their motivations for doing it are.
...and sometimes, it really is important to actually know.
However, this gets into the old debate about whether motivations should determine suitability, and that might be more even more tangential than would be warranted here?
OTOH, I'll just go ahead and throw it out there:
If you ran a church in Bach's day, and wanted to commission music or artwork to "glorify" it. Would any particular artist be deemed unsuitable if they were an atheist?
Should Berkeley not have accepted Well's application for graduate school, knowing that he was a disciple of Sun Yung Moon and that Moon himself was funding it? Moreover, with hindsight, knowing how much damage to science education the man would end up contributing to?
Just ignore if this isn't the time or place to hack at this stuff.
But eddie, what if SocraticGadfly has never seen the movie, but knows the composition from another source? Would it be wrong to find the music wonderful on its own merits?
I doubt s/he even understands the reference.
I do. One of my favorite spaghetti westerns.
and, sadly, no, your reference is irrelevant.
We weren't talking about the negative impacts of the church on society that I can see.
well, at least not in this thread.
yet.
While we're on the subject of art appreciation and responsibility, I read Roberto Bolaño's By Night in Chile a while ago, and felt at the end like I as the reader was being implicated. I don't know if this was the intent or if I was projecting my own guilt onto the novel. If it was the intent, it was brilliant. I would be really interested to hear if anyone else had a similar response. (I don't read many scholarly works in this field, so this may be obvious to people in the know.)
@ Eddie, Grendel, Ichthyic... I've got The GBU in my video library. I also understood the reference. And, whether the church is good or bad today, musicians are free agents. Composers can get private commissions, NEA commissions, etc. Or they can write religious music... whether commissioned or not.
Tony Kushner. Sholem Aleichem. To mention two non-Xns.
Ichthyic @ 230... NO, I'll give that a shot.
I don't think you can fully analogize the two situations, for two reasons... church employer vs. state university, and short-term vs. long-term motivations. But, maybe I can tweak it into a Dennett-type "thought pump"?
If I were a Christian prince of 300 ya, I think atheists, if known as such, would be de facto disqualified from the music, or stained glass, or something. As an architect, if no specific iconic-type design were involved, might be different.
Let's put Wells in a different position. Let's have him going to BYU or Notre Dame, and not just wanting a PhD but a tenured professorship there as part of a package deal. In that case, if I'm BYU or Notre Dame, I don't admit him.
In the actual situation, though, because Wells' long-term motivation constrained his short-term motivation, sure, let him in; in a sense, he's under more of a microscope than a John Doe student in the same or similar degree program. And, Berkeley could even put disclaimers on its degrees, like this:
"The attainment of this degree from the University of California implies no endorsement of political or other opinions by the earner of this degree."
Given websites such as Dissent from Darwin, that actually ain't a bad idea.
Holbach probably went to bed. It pretty late where he lives.
Apologies to SC, OM. Clearly you do appreciate the link between oppression and the works done to glorify oppressors. I didn't think it was so difficult for some to see.
Grendel's Dad @231;
"Would it be wrong to find the music wonderful on its own merits? "
That would be what I was getting at when I said; "...my, how wonderful..."
But I think anyone who's not seen the movie may have only a narrow, shallow appreciation of art. And, even having seen the movie, to completely miss the prison reference as SG seems to have done, makes me wonder at their blindness.
Icthyic - "We weren't talking about the negative impacts of the church on society that I can see."
Ah, that'll be the compartmentalising I keep hearing about. You don't see religious music, glorifying oppressors, as a negative impact of religion on society?
Since you got the prison reference, could you help SG out by explaining? Here's a link that may help.
Let's have him going to BYU or Notre Dame, and not just wanting a PhD but a tenured professorship there as part of a package deal. In that case, if I'm BYU or Notre Dame, I don't admit him.
now that's an interesting perspective I hadn't considered.
However, don't the same "rules" apply? Isn't the reason you wouldn't admit him to Notre Dame in essence the same reason one might reject him from Berkeley for an advanced science degree?
Isn't it still just a case of "unsuitability" due to the ideological position of the applicant?
or am I missing something?
I have my own opinion on this (that Wells basically should really only have been admitted to the ICR ;) ), but I rather think myself in the minority on that, well, depending on which department I might find myself in, anyway.
see, that's the thing. Wells was admitted to the molecular and cell biology program at Berkeley, but I see little chance that ANY professor within zoology at the time would have supported his admission (and frankly, none did, but of course that had no impact on whether or not he got admitted to MCB).
Does a university have a responsibility to the general public for the people they "train"? If we turn out bad scientists, even though we have the option to reject them on obvious ideological grounds, do we have the responsibility to do so?
Wells is a clear case where his motivations and inspirations were entirely transparent.
What about someone like Miller? I don't know his early background, but what if he was a staunch catholic, and even stated up front that he put god before education and science, if need be. However, it is clearly NOT his motivation for getting an advanced degree.
would that be enough to reject him as a grad student in science?
I'm glad you think it worth hashing out, though. almost 20 years later, I still wonder what I would have done given the same case. It's easier (slightly) with hindsight, seeing how the man abused his degree, but I used to have lunch with him when he was a grad student, and at the time might have made a different decision.
Not the first time we've had this discussion here either, I think.
Yes, I know I just godwined, but it was apt. Now I'm off to bed.
"The works done to glorify oppressors" is way broad. There's a lot more to it than this.
?
@ 27: Yeah, I know what you mean.
What was the freakin' point?
It - crap, It's...
The cootie is with us tonight.
ROFLMAO... I just started seizing! Although it could have been demons and not the flash abuse.
Ceiling Cat wants les Flash, more cheezburger.
@ 243,
Careful there !
*Cue shouts of "you're making fun of my epilepsy" in 3,2,1...*
Wow -- the trailer for the new big-screen remake of The Bishop!
Allow me to suggest a variant of this idea: a Wittgenstein's beetle box. You can decorate it any way you like, and anything you put in the box will be a beetle by definition.
wrt Dali vids on youtube, I rather thought his appearance on "What's My Line" was almost a testament to his life as an artist.
whoever thought to invite him on that show was either a genius, or stupid lucky.
http://tr.youtube.com/watch?v=iXT2E9Ccc8A
@ Eddie one last time. NO, I do understand the movie and the reference. I said that earlier, when I said I have it in my home
You, though, REFUSE to understand that no such "prison" applies today, and it's not even an issue of compartmentalization. Your link to Nazi prison camps has absolutely ZERO relevance. The modern free world is no such thing.
Rather, it's an issue of you being a nutbar as well as a fucking idiot. I apologize for ONLY calling you a fucking idiot earlier.
So, to state again, Eddie, you're a nutbar, a wingnut of some "wing" to boot, and a fucking idiot. You're a fucking idiot NOT because you're stupid, but because you're a nutbar and a wingnut.
Schnittke or Penderecki writing 20th-century requiems, or Stravinsky writing his Symphony of Psalms, have LESS than zero to do with your wingnuttery. The only "prison" around here is the conspiracy one into which you've locked your own braincase.
@ Ichthyic @ 238. First, agreed on the ICR. And, I live in Dallas!
Second, I "upped the stakes" by throwing in the tenured professorship, not just changing the university, to have Wells' short-term and long-term motivations run parallel. Tis true that if this were the case, Berkeley would have similar reasons to boot him or ban him in advance.
Or course, in the real world, if he were academically qualified for the PhD program, no way Cal could ban him. Especially if on religious grounds. HUGE 1st Amdt lawsuit. For that matter, since BYU and ND both receive various federal largesse, I doubt they could, either. (Obviously, if he were in the divinity program, 'twould be different.)
Once a Wells type is in the system, if his mindset is biasing his work, I think there's room to boot him. Ditto on dissertation and defense.
Of course, in the medieval era, "professors" got their title by swearing an oath. Maybe that's the answer to a Wells. Not a loyalty oath to the government, but one to the integrity of their research and study?
That would also address the issue of being able to burrow mole-like into a academic career once one has tenure.
Mike in Ontario,NY @220- "I'd rather watch 20 minutes of that flash animation than have my visual cortrex tainted by even a glimpse of that douche bag's "art" ever again. He's worse that the oil-on-velvet Jesus over an 18-wheeler I used to own."
Yes, yes, and a thousand times yes. Gawd I hate Kincaid, the "painter of light". His "works" are the most gag-worthy pieces of crap in contemporary art.
My vote for "Master of Light" goes to-
http://es.geocities.com/artinmovies/Whitlocks-gallery.html
Click on the links down the right side of the page.
RIP, Albert Whitlock....
Or course, in the real world, if he were academically qualified for the PhD program, no way Cal could ban him.
in principle, correct. In practice, it's actually quite easy. One might even go so far as to say too easy. I've seen it done.
Even easier is to prevent someone entering the program, as it requires the support of a major prof to begin with, and any major prof has the ultimate say in who they want for their labs. Typically, there is considerable competition for the few spots available anyway. Moreover, that say carries weight all the way through until a student successfully defends, too, which is why students can still be tossed from grad programs (though it's pretty rare). A prof can also sabotage a student's stay in grad school easily enough, with just a bit of support from anybody else in the dept.
I've seen one case where a student was tossed for "personal" reasons relating to "conflicts of interest", where no first amendment issues were involved. OTOH, I saw the very same professor get sued (successfully) over tossing a student because they were ill and had to delay their research a year or two.
It's correct to say that the uni itself, as an institution, could not bar someone from applying for ideological reasons, but the reality within a department is far different.
That said, for the sake of further argument of the real point, which is one of "suitability", let's pretend there are no constitutional issues involved.
Not a loyalty oath to the government, but one to the integrity of their research and study?
I'm not sure a "loyalty" oath in science would look that much different than what the fundies require for many of their non-profit institutions where one is required to take a "faith" oath.
It seems kinda ridiculous on the surface. OTOH, at least it would be a place to start, even if it had no real teeth.
Related to that, some have suggested changing the rules regarding the permanency of advanced degrees, such that they can actually be withdrawn by department that granted them.
I can see advantages and disadvantages to this. Aside from the obvious possibility that this could be abused (especially with small depts), it kind of offends my sense of "fair play". It seems a bit arbitrary to me to allow degrees to be pulled by consensus, after one has already done all the hard work (usually) to get it.
grrr. bloody frustrating.
I think I'm liking the idea that degrees CAN be subject to peer review, rather like a Contractor's license can be.
I just can't imagine the hassle, though, of having to not only participate in such a review as a subject, but as a reviewer. It's hard enough doing research and teaching as it is.
...
All that said, I want to stress (to lurking trolls) that the above in no way describes the kind of strawman that was erected in "Expelled". In fact, the very reason I can discuss the options, is that there IS NOT a common trend within academia to oust religious leaning students or professors, and Jonathan Wells is a perfect case in point.
In fact, the vast majority of those in academia feel quite responsible to turn out good students that will indeed teach good science and contribute to our general knowledge through research.
It's like if you were training a building contractor, and ran across someone, who, while always following the lesson plan, nevertheless constantly said things like "When I'm done here, I'm gonna make office buildings out of straw and shit, because all you "steelites" are just biased against us organic builders!".
What would YOU do, eh? Would you still give this person their contractors license? Would you pull it from them if they really did start espousing the wonders of office buildings constructed of straw bricks?
/message to lurking trolls
Ichthyic, thanks for the response, especially for detailing (shades of our earlier back and forth!) the difference between an abstract student's grad school application and an actual student's application, progress, etc.
The "oath" would be a place to start. I think it could have, or be given teeth, if one had to sign it as part of a tenure hearing, in which case, legally, it would be contractual.
That's a better option than a university "pulling" a degree, I think. Maybe, instead of "pulling," you have to do something similar to continuing education credits, like attending so many professional conferences? IDer-types trying to "burrow in" could continue to be hypocrites at such conferences, but having to do so year after year would surely beat them down at least a bit.
I await your response! (Tomorrow, as this night owl is finally going to snooze.)
tmorrow, then. I need to do something else for a while too.
Play the Game!! Play the Game!!!
at www.sharperfx.com
I .can't .stop.laughing. oho ho ho ho ho ho....(expires due to breathlessness)
225#
Well that was 30 seconds I will never see again in my lifetime...
I don't see why Scientology can be a religion but they can't.
It's a shame it didn't work. I'd think about starting my own religion. The Holy Church of the Telecommuter. You can work 7 days a week, but only from home (preferably from the back porch). Offerings via PayPal, bake sales via eBay, an IRC bot for taking confessions, maybe I could even get those sharperfx folks to design the services. It would make a great racket scam religion.
It was like Monty Python on bad acid.
Wow!
I T BLEW M y Min d!
Oh .. FLASH is it? I was wondering why I only had red and blue bands and nothing else. Then I stared at the pattern in those bands until I saw demons staring back at me. I think I saw a Mutant Ninja Turtle too - possibly Donatello.
Now for the Church of Body Modification, they state:
"... we ensure that we live as spiritually complete and healthy individuals."
I have to suggest an edit on that:
"... we ensure that we live as spiritually complete nutcases"
Not that it's relevant, but pictures for the Church of Body Modification got me thinking: Wouldn't it be cool if the cult from "The Wicker Man" were real? I know I'd join.
A friend of mine joined the Church of Body Modification... but only so his boss would stop harassing him about a handful of tattoos he had. "Sorry, d00d, it's my religion."
That's a good idea :-)
You'll love this:
TV sends message that
"Christians are nutters"
It demonstrates the power of ridicule.
Maybe I'm being a bliss ninny today, but I don't see why musical taste is something worth getting all vituperative about (yes, vituperative). If someone appreciates Bach's religious works, whether they think the "spiritual" aspect adds something or not, and someone else finds that the religious themes or underpinnings spoil it for them, big deal. I love sushi, and my girlfriend finds it not to her taste. In my world, she's missing out on culinary delight, but in her world, she's only "missing out" on undercooked fish (and wasabi... forget about it). It's not like we try to tear each other a new asshole over it.
@Kraid @264... it's not the musical (or artistic) taste per se, but IMO, the "why" that drives Holbach on this issue. It's a particular narrow-mindedness that, IMO, self-forfeits his claim to have taste above a certain level.
Bach was very religious. For his oratories he was called the Fifth Evangelist.
Not quite so fast.
Maybe he happens to know that "overseer" is a literal translation of "bishop" (episkopos).
I had to sign just such an oath to get my Master title.
Of course, SocraticGadfly, name-calling has always been better than actually having an argument. At least in your head.
And yes, you know exactly what the point is. That's why you have been repeatedly trying to move it elsewhere and then whining when others stick to it.
The point has always been how religion has used art, music, architecture, etc. as tools of oppression, how it's faux glorification of imaginary entities has really been about the glorifying of thugs, and how it's ignorant, venal apologists have insisted how wonderful the art is on it's own merits, that however bad it used to be, it's not like that now. And that they (yes you) willfully blind themselves to the suffering of others.
Use all the invective you like. It says so much more about you than I ever could.
At Eddie one more time...
You're worse than Holbach. Certainly SOME religions have done that SOME of the time, but with a brush as broad as yours, I could paint over all of Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling with one stroke.
As for specifics, to snarkily answer your nutbar oppression, and to confine it to free-will choices in modern times.
So, how many people starved to death after Stravinsky wrote "Symphony of Psalms"? How many people were imprisoned after Part wrote any of his religious music?
As for invective, look in the mirror, buddy. With your "oppression" comments out of not left or right field, but some Twilight Zone field, you started it.
Beyond that, you refuse to read what other people say, namely what I've said repeatedly... that even if/when some religions engaged in some oppression in the past, in free world societies today, there simply IS NO SUCH THING.
Nobody forces you to join a religion in America today.
Nobody forces you to financially support a religion.
Religions get no special tax breaks that other charities don't.
Let, musicians of both classical and other bents continue to write religious music in America today, some of which is quite artistic.
I'll repeat, the only "slavery" is that of your own thought processes. And, you're the one living inside your head, not me inside mine.
And, therefore, I'm done talking "at" you because it's impossible to talk "with" you. (Besides that, on your first post on this thread, you indicated classical music didn't really interest you that much anyway.)
@ David Marjanović @266: Was the "not so fast" directed at me? The factual info about Deutschland ueber Alles is correct. That said, I forgot that it was still (in one stanza) the German national anthem. Point is, I can "frame" the music to box out its Nazi connection.
The horrendous Flash website is apparently done by http://www.sharperfx.com/ and these other two exhibit the same type of completely over-the-top Flash intro:
http://www.newbirthcal.org/
http://www.itistruth.org/
I'm am gobsmacked over the idea that a web designer would propose such a thing (and then implement it), but also by the idea that there are people *paying* for this crap.
--
David W. Fenton
http://dfenton.com/NoComment/
"Point is, I can "frame" the music to box out its Nazi connection."
Says it all, really. Those concentration camp victims with their nasty oppression complex....
I happen to think the motivations are irrelevant, but at some point it becomes almost meaningless to talk about "religious" and "secular" music. J.S. Bach and other religious composers can be inspired by religious ideas all they want. I couldn't care less, as long as it's good music. However, except for overtly religious texts, how is any music actually "religious" in itself? Please give an example of distinctly religious forms and/or harmonies which would not have been produced by a non-believer.
Please note that the very foundations of music theory and acoustics came from a bunch of Pythagorean religious nuts. Also note that these ideas could have been described purely in empirical and mathematical terms, but as it happens they were not.
Should we attribute the music of a great religious composer (such as J.S. Bach) to:
1) Christianity;
2) all forms of religion which influenced music up to that point;
3) scientific, mathematical, and aesthetic inquiry;
4) some combination of these; or
5) other factors I haven't listed?
For what it's worth, I'm placing my bet on 4 or 5.
SocraticGadfly @ 268
I'm back, and with a comment I overlooked in the heat of the contentious comments on religious crap music. You mentioned at post 171 that you have "a graduate degree in divinity". Was this supposed to impress me or give credence to your state of mind, a mind infected with irrational nonsense and certified by an institution that should not be recognized by an sane individual? Have you forgotten that I am an atheist, and that such a degree of "nonsense" is the lowest state that any so called educational institution can bestow on a mind already afflicted with religious nonsense? Do you expect me to accord you a modicum of respect, let alone recognition as a sensible human being? I would readily respect someone with a degree of "refuse recycling" than acknowledge your irrational screed in the art of perpetrating idiotic nonsense. I can argue with and tolerate the likes of Heddle, Facilis, et al who profess a belief in an imaginary thing but do not have a degree in nonsense that shows they have wasted those years and brain cells and have the freaking nerve to boast that they have acheived something worthwhile in the name of reason. No, you are a loser as I consider all persons who labor under the delusion of religious nonsense and expect to be recognized for a useless and irrational calling.
I am glad you linked my name with Eddie, as he is also able to expose your pathetic views which have been warped by the pox of religion. "Degree of divinity" indeed. That nonsense screed will serve you well when you die, for the worms will devour paper as well as you with little regard.
Re Compositionalist @271;
Think of the form of the Fugue, and it's rules and conventions of progression and such. It's not primarily about the religion. In Frederik's day, they made composition into an industrial process, just as in hitlers day they did with their killing.
It's the apologists that claim it was about religion or spirituality, even though they know the truth.
Holy crap! That flash intro was the coolest MMORPG guild website intro I've ever seen!
All religions need flash intros like this one in their websites.
This one has truly up the ante to any religion.
Jains, Jews, Wiccans, Bahais, Yog Sothotherers and Metalists: heed the call and put some effort in your flash intros. This is the way of the future where religions are cool flash intros.
eddie @ 273:
That was essentially my point. There's nothing in music itself which is religious or spiritual, unless you already believe in that nonsense. The question becomes whether great music which happens to be "inspired" by religion should be appreciated because it was inspired by the nonsense, or in spite of it. Personally, I just like great music because it's great music, and try not to give much thought to the nonsense behind a lot of it.
Yes. I agreed with Grendel's Dad on just that point. If you just heard the music without knowing all that goes with it, you may well say "My, how wonderful. Top tune".
Knowing all that goes with it, I feel obliged to recognise the suffering and express sympathy for those who suffered. Others know all that goes with it and don't care: A very religious morality.
There is some wonderful contemporary jeebus music - check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-NOZU2iPA8
but eddie, no one can ever be in a state of "knowing all that goes with it" when it concerns a work of art. Not with all the historical and biographical information in the world.
Also, you shouldn't blame all religious composers for the oppression inflicted by their religions, unless you're only talking about specific composers like Wagner and such.
Naturally, there was a tradition among students of taking religious songs and writing more interesting lyrics for them. And it's well known that the Song of Songs is a carousing song that got mixed in with the scriptures. All that "bride of the church" stuff is pretty thin when we remember that the Bible Must be Taken Literally.
"Holy Flash Abuse, Batman! You have to see the intro page for the International Congress of Churches & Ministers to believe it. Somebody had way too much coffee."
Holy Flash Abuse indeed! I think my eyes melted . . . . .
Compositionalist, you're right. It is wrong to blame Bach for the injustices of Frederik's regime, or the other European powers of the day, or to blame Wagner for '30s Germany. I don't think that's what we've been doing. It is legitimate to criticise the circumstances surrounding how the art was made, or commissioned and to object to those who would deny that it is tainted.
It has been claimed, erroneously that this sort of thing doesn't go on today. If you line on or near the site of a recent or planned olympic games you would disagree. Still, it would be wrong to blame the athletes, and those new buildings look really nice...
Eddie:
First, you forgot “patriarchy” and “dead white males” in previous diatribes. You must be slipping.
Second, in 21st-century America, I can name PLENTY of things more “oppressive” than American Christianity.
The two-party duopoly comes to mind, either in and of itself, or allied with Wall Street or the military-industrial complex.
“American exceptionalism,” held my most two-party duopoly voters and a fair number of independents and probably a fair amount of capital-L libertarians, is a bigger international oppressor in much of the world (with exceptions of Palestianians being oppressed by fundamentalist Jews in Israel backed by fundamentalist Christians in the U.S.) than is American Christianity.
Capitalism run amok is more oppressive.
Third, as I said before in passing, you’re wayyy too simplistic, too willing to see religion in terms of black and white. (I suspect Holbach is too some degree, but not nearly your degree.)
Tis true that 150 years ago, Southern slaveowners turned to the bible to justify holding their slaves. Tis also true that most Northern abolitionists turned to the bible for the inspiration for their crusade. Tis also true, beyond that, that the enslaved blacks turned to their own version of Chrstianity, co-opted from their white masters, for consolation.
In short, religion as a sociological phenomenon is a LOT more nuanced and gray-shaded than your dime-store caricature. Which is what it is – a caricature. There’s a reason I used the old phrase, “village idiot atheism,” earlier in this thread, but you exemplify it more than Holbach.
In short, your view of religion is as simplistic as fundies’ view is of everything outside their churches. In short, you’ve created a Tar Baby and now you’re psychologically stuck to it.
And, I can get more sarcastic yet.
Because, those things DON'T go on today, in the examples I mentioned.
And, WTF do Olympic Games have to do with religion? Just shows how illogical hyou are.
@ Holbach 273 -- no, it was in reference to your claim that SC's art degree meant he didn't have either special knowledge or interest there.
In case you didn't read all of an earlier post, I said I'm an "antitheist" myself. (I like Hitchens' word)
BUT, WTF is it with you and Eddie not reading everything I write? I said it with accidental log-in as "anonymous" at 160 and under my handle at 195.
Because you didn't read that -- and I said it clearly in one of my posts (and apparently you think I don't know what "Holbach" means, you pompous pseudo-baron) why don't you shove some of that bilgewater bile in your "noble" bunghole?
So, Holbach, until you LEARN HOW TO FUCKING READ.... pull your head out of your ass. (I'm not holding my breath.)
Nowhere did I say I'm a "theist" today. I've posted regularly here on other issues. I'm a regular poster to Carnival of the Godless.
But, because you're too fucking lazy to read...
Or to be blunter yet, fuck you and the Eddie you rode in on.
@David:
I had to sign just such an oath to get my Master title.
really?
any chance you have a link to that somewhere?
I'd like to see what the wording is.
Socraticgodfly @ 284
You are as much godless as I am a religious retard. Your "degree of nonsense" marks you as you so richly deserve, a religious moron who wants and reaps the benefits of education yet embraces the demented tenets of imaginary gods in the guise of crap religion. Did your "degree" also germinate the vulgar euphemisms you so lavish in your comments? Has your imaginary god persuaded you to be so primitive in defense of it and your character?
I despise religion and all who embrace it's demented ideas, but especially with the utmost contempt those who pursue an idiotic degree of blatant religious bullshit to give credence to their wasted lives.
I don't give a crap on how many posts you comment on; to me you are a religious moron with a certified "degree" to prove to the rabble masses that you have sacrificed your limited intellect to their idiotic awe and grovelling. You are lower than slime mold to my estimation, and as is my wont to do, I won't waste my time badgering with you in any manner but avoid you as a repilsive pile of shit. Your use of "village idiot atheism" at # 195 in an indirect affront to me only assures your state and position as a religious slime who presumes to know their betters.
Why don't you shove your imaginary shit god up your rectum as far as your rotted brain to purge it of your infested nest of demented religious crap. You are a pathetic excuse for evolution gone awry.
I just had three separate reactions:
Holy Crap.
Gag me with a spoon.
Never mind, I think I'll skip lunch.
Don't stoop to his level, Holbach. He shows the world, out of his own foul mouth.
Did I call him a theist? No. I called him an apologist. And then he rails at me for it with a comment full of apologisms. I did use the word 'compartmentalising', which he also railed against; misusing the term 'framing' for what was in fact compartmentalising. He keeps using the WTF thing, and when things are axplained to him, twice, he still doesn't get it. As for 'specious'; I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
It's the arrogance of ignorance. He's unteachable. I give up.
eddie @ 288
Thanks for your comments and support. As I mentioned at 286, I will not even bother to waste my breath and brain cells on his religion demented skull, and will not reply to any of his posts no matter how incendiary they are. I hope he notices the "godfly" after Socratic, a fitting description of his meager existence.
Religion does definitely affect an afflicted moron's thought processes, misinterpreting and substituting one explanation for another that disagrees with them. These religious idiots cannot fathom what an ardent atheist like myself think and regard a clueless idiot besotted with brainless religion. I regard them with contempt, and even more so those religious retards who possess a certificate to prove that they have mastered the insane art of suckering the rabble sheep with a "higher calling" of babbling insanity.
If I see his name on any future posts I will read and scrutinize those comments and look for an instance of weakness in thought or delivery and do my best to ridicule that comment and him. I am never the first to call names, except perhaps when dealing with the garden variety of godbot with moron, etc, bur never with anything harsher than that, but will reciprocate just as severe when initially directed at me personally.
This type of religious idiot has never intimidated me and never will. I have the power of a mind free of religious nonsense, whereas he is limited by that insane crap that has effected his judgment and composure, and makes a wrong impression on those he thinks he can overwhelm with his "degree of nonsense".
I like your comments and hope you will continue to post, especially against the likes of the "godfly".
Do either of you (eddie or Holbach) care to address my questions in #272? It seems important to at least have answer to them.
There is a sense in which music need not be expressed in terms of religion and spirituality. Yes or no? If your answer is yes, please explain how you form a consistent definition of "religious music". If you really don't want to expose yourself to it, then you'd better have a good way of identifying it.
There is a sense in which the entire enterprise of art (including music) owes its existence to prehistoric and ancient mysticism/religion/nonsense. Yes or no? Should all irrationally-inspired ideas be thrown out immediately, even if they turn out to be rational ones? This only places limits on the kind of rational thoughts I am willing to entertain, not on the irrational formulations of the deluded people who came up with them.
Again, I'm an atheist like yourselves, and I'm not at all apologizing for religion. However, I see huge, gaping epistemological holes in your positions as you've expressed them so far.
Holbach, OK, you're a religious retard. Your words, not mine You're also, IMO, a cyberbully, but I'll keep posting on this thread. Won't work on me.
You also show you either still can't, or won't, read the words of a gAdfly, or you're now at the 2-year-old level of clusterfuckery, as well as childish pseudopuns.
You also don't know why I got that degree, what I have done with my life afterword, or how my metaphysical stance, or antimetaphysical stance, has evolved, but CONTINUE to make UNwarranted assumptions, showing the incredible illogic of your feeble attempt at "argumentation." No wonder so many other people scoff at you, too.
So "scrutinize" my post. You haven't done so in the past. It would be a welcome change.
If you don't like the language and invective, that's your problem. You started this with your REFUSAL TO READ, and now compound it with your EMPIRICALLY UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTIONS, followed by ILLOGICAL INFERENCES.
So, that's illiteracy, lack of empirical facts and illogic. I think I've covered all of it.
For your further information, and on the slim chance you'll actually read something I wrote, PZ himself linked to this post I wrote about him getting expelled from Expelled:
http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2008/03/pharyngula-gets-creationist-…
Try actually reading it before making any more of your unwarranted accusations, eh?
Eddie shows he still can't read, as I never said what he called me or didn't call me, in terms of metaphysical stances.
Someone may have already commented on this, but doesn't this violate one of the Commandments or something?
Those wacky Christians...
I just found it quite interesting when the phrase "Anointed - Directed - Dedicated to God!" flashed across the screen.
Hmm...anointed...directed...dedicated.
A...D...D...hey!
Now it's easy to understand their choice of animation style. They're playing to their modern audience.
Re Compositionalist @290;
I Think Bach was doing what he could to make a living in the society he was in. The false rationalisation of his religion was the same false rationalisation his masters used to maintain power. He did what he had to do to get by.
I think that to accept a piece of art as religious/spiritual you need to buy into that false rationalisation. I fully accept that Bach did buy into it but see no reason for anyone to do so today. That's why I referred to it as tainted by religion, rather than religious.
Again re: @290;
"There is a sense in which the entire enterprise of art (including music) owes its existence to prehistoric and ancient mysticism/religion/nonsense."
Certainly art is largely about getting something from inside yourself into the world outside yourself, for yourself or for others. The claim that what's inside yourself comes from outside, put there by something or other is orthogonal to this. Australian Dreamtime myths seem to be more true to this than organised religion.
There's nothing shameful about painting the ideas in your head. I feel that claiming those ideas were put there by FSM, etc, is akin to claiming "God told me to kill those prostitutes". At heart, it's about not taking responsibility for yourself.
eddie
I'm sorry, but your responses are pretty lame. You haven't answered anything, and you keep going on these tangents. Leave Bach, FSM, prostitutes, and everyone else out of it for a moment.
Let's say you hear piece of music X. It has no lyrics and you aren't shown the title. Your job is to determine whether it was composed by a believer or non-believer of some religion Y. In fact, even if you were told the composer of X is a self-described non-believer in Y, the composer could still believe in lots of other garbage G not related to any organized religion whatsoever. You still wouldn't be able to determine any of this just from the art work itself.
There's no way to know, so it just doesn't matter, unless there is evidence or a logical necessity. Remind you of anyone? *cough* *religious nuts* *cough* Get over it.