What's the Christian argument against rock music?

Teenage wild is just one flavour of wild. One which I have zero taste for. Wild at 45 means able to keep being surprised, still learning, still joyful, still full of energy and curiosity. It means putting away childish things, and the first of these - as someone famous once said - is the desire to appear grown up.

By dumbed down I mean commercial, made to be palatable to the masses. Like a white mans' curry

 

Depends on what era. I don't have much use for the current stuff.

 

Quite often I find "commercial" is just a buzz word for "successful". If the music's good, I don't care if its "commercial" or "underground". As far as your difinition of wild, maybe I do fit, because I'm constantly, amazed and surprised by Christ, I still joyfully learn more about Theology, and I'm highly energetic in church planting and my curiousity is consistently peaked by the intricacies of scripture. So I doubt if I appear very "grown up", listening to "Hollywood Undead", or "Down" and reading Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem.

 

I knew there was some reason that rock music hurts my ears. I thought it was because its usually too loud.

 

The Clash's fourth album was Sandinista, which was praising that revolution. Of course the Clash was leftist.

 

I agree with another poster - the 80s are looking for you, they want their topic back.

Seriously though. It's not all that difficult to discern between music that is sinful and music that isn't. Some rock music is not at all sinful in its lyrics. And lyrics are what matters, not the instruments nor the manner in which they're played.

 

Lol.. no kidding.

No wonder he never checked back in on his thread.

 

Sin? - it doesn't exist - just mind control set up by those in power

Why do so many rich Christians sin??

 

You must be talking about ultra-conservative or fundamentalist Christians - I've never known any Christians, even including some fundies, who are 'against rock music' altogether. I've known a few who are against 'extreme/death/etc metal' because of supposed "Satanic imagery". I don't listen to extreme metal but not because I think it's "Satanic", but because IMO if it's mostly 'screaming' then it's not music, just noise.

It's also not a good conversation starter with women in general since most the the themes are violent, dark, depressing, etc, and since it's an "underground" genre (meaning a lot of people have never heard of most of the artists, and can't relate to it) - so unless a guy knows a lot of girls who're heavily into the 'metal scene', then I'd definitley recommend he diversify his musical interests because "Angel of Death" by Slayer is not going to make for sexy conversation with most women on a date, at a bar, etc.

...but anyway, so why are Muslims against eating pork anyway?

 

Its gods least favourite music genre.

 

I hear he likes a bit of dubstep.

 

Does evil exist?

 

Human nature exists. People can only do those things that we are inherently capable of doing. Evil would consist of doing something that we have never done before in our existence. Since we have the power of creation and destruction as well as our other attributes anything that we do along those lines is not evil. Only the gods are evil.

 

YouLie: Is a cat evil for eating a mouse?

 

You say sin doesn't exist, then you ask why so many rich Christians sin..?!

Anyway... all Christians sin. It's not limited to the wealthy.

 

Interesting. No christianity = no sin.

 

He is obviously very talented as he managed to contradict himself in just two sentences.

 

The problem with so many of them, is that they even bother arguing about it in the first place.

You can't win by saying "There is no such thing as God.... Why do people eat shrimp when God said not to???"

They do this all the time.

They need to just stand strong in their belief and say "There is no God. Period."

Continuing to argue about it only brings out the uncertainty in their stance, and always shows them to be trying to convince themselves... not others. They can't see it, but they love to deny it.

 

Good point. It doesn't really matter if God is evil or good because if he doesn't exist, it really doesn't matter. The. best they could hope for is the supposed lack of evidence for God.

 

There is absolutely no Logic to your post.

I am not an Atheist by the way.

The ONUS is upon those claiming a supernatural all powerful deity exist to provide PROOF of such a deity existing.

There is ZERO onus upon those who do not believe such a deity exists to provide proof such a deity does exist.

The FACTS are....there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever existing that would provide proof that a GOD exists.

AboveAlpha

 

Reading your post, I don't know how you are not an atheist. Thank you for writing like you have terrets. It made reading your post all the more easier.

Funny thing is I agree with you to a certain point. You are moving in the right direction by not trying to make a moral argument. If the God of the Bible is an evil God, so what? Who says an evil God can't exist?

 

My point is that there does not exist proof that a GOD exists....period.

Logic dictates that the person claiming something akin to the Tooth Fairy or Santa or the Easter Bunny has the onus upon them to provide proof....not the other way around.

If I were you....I would not make this personal by including insults in your replies.

This is simply a debate forum on the internet and such behavior is simply ridiculous and ignorant.

AboveAlpha

 

Well, there's no need for you to shout in caps to anyone who may disagree with you. I don't take it personally. It was actually a pretty light hearted post. I just couldn't resist making a funny.

 

Since you evidently lack understanding of debating devices, I'll explain. We ask questions about the things theists claim on behalf of their god. In order to do this we abbreviate (obviously) by talking about god as a theoretical agency.

The point is to draw attention to the many problems in the bible. What sort of debate would it be if we sat on our hands and refused to say anything but "I'm right, you're wrong"? That would not only be a non-debate, it would actually be quite insulting to theists. You should be pleased we take the time to really think about your position, and make the effort to discuss and debate it.

Perhaps you just find any debate of theism objectionable?

 

OK then....we have no issue.

AboveAlpha