T
TaterTot
Guest
Yes, you!! I'd love to have you come play.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Again, that's not the argument. The argument is not about matter and non-matter. It's about the carnal nature and the spiritual nature. To which does something appeal?Originally posted by Aaron:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by webdog:
To conclude that if something appeals to our likes and emotions (body, matter) is wrong and evil, is in fact a form of gnosticism. God created us to like drums, beats, cymbals, etc. To use gnostic reasoning of "drums are good if you stand, sinful if you sit" or "if I like how drums sound, it must be worldly (sinful)" is not only comical, but false teaching.
That's a problem everywhere you go, but we aren't allowed the luxury of abandoning the question because of the presuppositions of some, or of the difficulty others have in answering it. But what is good is good for all, and what is evil is evil for all. God is the One who decides.Originally posted by Johnv:
The problem is that some have for themselves decided what is carnal, and hence decided it must be carnal for all, and as such banned.
Yes it does. The delineation between carnal and non-carnal forms of music is the same delineation one makes between other forms of artas in the difference between a good photo and pornography.Originally posted by webdog:
I am very well aware what the argument is about, and it really has nothing to do with appealing to man's "carnal nature".
Yes it does. The delineation between carnal and non-carnal forms of music is the same delineation one makes between other forms of artas in the difference between a good photo and pornography.Originally posted by Aaron:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by webdog:
I am very well aware what the argument is about, and it really has nothing to do with appealing to man's "carnal nature".
If you're going to quote me, do it accurately. I said simply, my position is the correct one. But I fail to see how you could use that to deprecate me, because everyone arguing this point feels his position is the correct one.Originally posted by Dale McNamee:
...in a long ago post in another thread on music: " My position is the correct one,I'm convinced of it."
I will pass by your personal attack of being called travelsong.Originally posted by Aaron:
webdog, are you sure you're not Travelsong in disguise? A painting or a photo is more than the sum of its parts. Break down a photo into pixels, colors and photographic paper, and you create the illusion that it's all good since there is nothing inherently evil about it's parts. But put these parts together in an evil composition, and it's an evil work. It should be burned just as books of "curious arts" were burned, Acts 19:19.
It's the same with music. We can by nature discern between music and random noises, because we take it in as a unified whole. It's a work. It's communication. It's interaction. It is, therefore, either good or evil. It isn't like a piece a driftwood that washed up on the shore that a man can use to either build his shelter or brain his neighbor. Music is the action itself.
It wasn't a personal attack. You're just making the exact same argument that he always did.Originally posted by webdog:
I will pass by your personal attack of being called travelsong.![]()
LOL...Originally posted by Dale McNamee:
I also don't like your presumptions regarding my faith in God...That's pure gall and arrogance,coming from you!![]()
Could you link us to any post of mine where I condemned anyone? If I say, "You're wrong," is that condemnation? If I say anything, and answer the objections raised to it, how am I doing anything but exercising my duty to give an answer?Originally posted by Dale McNamee:
...but you'll notice that I DID NOT TRY TO IMPOSE IT on anyone as YOU SFTEN DO in your postings and condemn those who differ.
You can't be serious! Now it's sin based on a certain speed and pressure applied to the drum? You should join the Sanhedrin!I already said I don't argue specific instruments. I argue styles. It's not so much whether or not a drum is played, but how it's played.
This statement is about the suitability of drums. Who's being condemned? Does someone have to agree with you about drums in order to not be condemning you?Bonga Dale said:
From your 01/06 post in the “Seedy Legacy” thread:
"quote:
Originally posted by tinytim:
If you do not believe that drums are pagan, then good. I agree with you, drums are not pagan.
Now this is a different statement. Drums as primary instruments are better suited to paganism than to Christianity .”