What religion produces the best music?

Christianity.

File: 14343822323.png (83KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 480x360px

>>74379548
Atheism

i stopped believing in god

>>74379607
Have fun in hell.

Mormonism

>>74379634
nice meme

>>74379645
Seriously though, why don't you believe in god? Your life would become a lot more meaningful if you chose to believe in something.

File: bach bach bach.jpg (66KB, 500x322px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x322px

>>74379665
Spooked.

Also the answer is Christianity, obviously.

>>74379597
this, the best artists are liberal atheists

it's my birthday today

According to google Grimes was raised Catholic.

So the answer isn't Catholic.

>>74379707
Happy Birthday, anon!

Have anything special to listen to today?

>>74379716
i associate Catholicism with child molesting priests, i guess the Grimes things doesn't help either

>>74379730
today isn't special

>>74379707
hb

>>74379752
>today isn't special
Today may not be special, but you are. Be sure to treat yourself.

>>74379548
Islam, for sure

>>74379831
thanks for the card

>>74379879
Anytime, boy.

since most classical composers were IN THEORY Christians , Christianity

but if you mean people that actually are really serious about it, I'd say the goat fuckers take the cake

>>74379607thats why you're a faggot

so why are the Christians so miserable?

>>74379870
This for sure we need more diversity quotas

>>74380078
ok

>>74379548
Black metal is based on christianity despite what the paganshitters claim so that one.

Islam

>>74379548
whatever grimes follows

>>74379716
lame post

>>74379680
Well... I can't disagree

>>74379548

>religion

American detected

Ex-Christians produce the best music

File: rabbi gundam.png (208KB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 500x700px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdYaNeU9iOo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xGGHUj6P3s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFosdm5-BuQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rPLxDQuCHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2fMhO6sBc8

>>74379575
fpbp

>>74382214
FUCKING BUMP MUCH WOW

>>74379665
>Your life would become a lot more meaningful if you chose to believe in something.

Biggest load of horseshit ever

>>74379707
Happy birthday faggot

Sufi Islam you fucking plebs

>>74379548
Hermeticism.
Not really a religion though.

>>74379645
>nods as good as a wink to a blind bat

Anon he's right for reasons you will never understand.
Hell is a state of being in Saṃsāra.

>>74382310
There's a reason many athiests kill themselves.


Also science is an extension of religion. You believe in science? You're inadvertently religious.

Catholics got your Bach.

>>74382214
Christian music sucks.

Most of the good music come for "exotic religious" influences.
Led zeppelin, most of grunge, most of todays modern electronic music.
All came from inspiration from exotic religions. But also from the effect those religions had on their interpretation of religions at home like Christianity.

Old musician greats were very inspired from the Christianity that was there at the time, because it hadn't been destroyed by the influences of the state and their insistence on secularism.
The irony is that secularism is an impossible task. Everything is religious and philosophical in nature.

>>>74379645
>Seriously though, why don't you believe in god? Your life would become a lot more meaningful if you chose to believe in something.
If you need to believe in god just to give more meaning to your life, you' re doing it wrong. To be precise the more rational position is agnosticism (I would add a pinch of atheism tho)

>>74382841
>If you need to believe in god just to give more meaning to your life, you' re doing it wrong
Correct, it should just come naturally from observation.
Philosophy is fucking interesting and the myths and teachings of old make it even more interesting.

But the problem is people that are obsessed with things of face value.
The correct position is pantheism. Because the universe and god are one and the same.

No matter how "disturbing" that is to people.

psychedelic mysticism / pantheism

>>74379548
Catholics/former Catholic agnostics. No contest.

>>74382786
To be this deluded on 4chan of all places. Please tell me you're looking for some quick (You)s.

>>74382786
You're a fucking bellend. I was a Catholic friar for 9 years - you don't know what you're talking about

>>74382870
>The correct position is pantheism. Because the universe and god are one and the same.
Still more respectable than revealed religions. Although I refuse to call nature or the universe a god.

>>74382915
4chan is probably a good place to develop delusional schizophrenia or something, i think he has that right to be delusional on here

>>74382949
yeah i feel like god isn't really the right word when describing that concept but it's the best approximation i can find. it's definitely not a personal, creator type god.

>>>74382310
>Also science is an extension of religion. You believe in science? You're inadvertently religious.
It' s better if you put down that crack man. If you want to be correct, science is a further development of phylosophy.

File: R-2339760-1278080402.jpeg.jpg (193KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 600x600px

Satinism!!!1 \m/ \m/ \m/

>>74383000
This guy gets it

File: B8Zo_qiIYAEk9V2.jpg (24KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x375px

>>74383000

>satinism

>>74383000
trips don't lie.

File: HermesTrismegistusCauc.jpg (57KB, 300x407px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 300x407px

>>74382915
You clearly need to lurk moar and understand memetics.
Science was established on the foundations of western esotericism.

You are the deluded one anon.

>>74382925
Did you understand the pages?
Or was it gibberish to you?

>>74382949
>I refuse to call nature or the universe a god
It's hard to admit the malevolent nature.
But once you see macroscopically, the universe is almost organ-like in nature. It's a living thing.

>>74383000
It's boring now the magic veil is beginning to lift.
It was cool when people didn't really get what satan was.

>>74379665
>Your life would become a lot more meaningful if you chose to believe in something.
sure
why does that thing have to be a god

>>74383081
A disenchanted world is a lie.
You don't have a choice, you should do so by fight or flight.

And read the messages and how the pages cover the ceiling.

File: ap,550x550,16x12,1,transparent,t.u3.png (169KB, 474x185px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 474x185px

>>74379716
>Grimes
>Catholic
lol

File: spector.jpg (122KB, 600x585px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 600x585px

>>74379548
well phil spector didn't practice bhuddism...

>>74383063
Got a Masters in Divinity from Oxford so what don't you stop pretending you have any idea what you're talking about.

>But once you see macroscopically, the universe is almost organ-like in nature. It's a living thing.

You're an idiot.

>>74383141
Producers have good "touch" because they're blind. Never seen Tommy?

>>74383149
>I have a bit of paper and an echochamber of tight assed uni students
>my opinion > your opinion

You're just a tame goat.

>>74383169
You literally made one of the most vapid and hollow non-comparisons I've ever heard and then proceed to knock other's, almost certainly more informed opinions. I don't think you understand that studying divinity doesn't involve mixing with other uni students as a friar.
> the universe is almost organ-like in nature. It's a living thing.
You should be a physics major with observations like that...

I was a sheep for a long time, and then I realized that religion is a lie; you can only really see it from the inside though. I was blind but now I see, hope the same happens for you

File: Phil_Spector.jpg (29KB, 239x367px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 239x367px

>>74383154
too true anon!
for only they can see...

spector was is a genius though
i mean, hes insane
but who in the music business isn't?

>>74383211
>You literally made one of the most vapid and hollow non-comparisons I've ever heard and then proceed to knock other's, almost certainly more informed opinions.
All you did was say "hey I went to oxford therefore I am better than you" like any other cunt with a degree that doesn't know what it fucking means.

Rule of thumb, try not signal with "hey look at me, I got a masters".
And yes it is physics like. Because to me there is no distinction between religion and science. It's all one big tool to help us observe ourselves and our environment.
It's our eyes. It's God's eyes.


>I was a sheep for a long time, and then I realized that religion is a lie; you can only really see it from the inside though.
You don't see shit. You're just a tame goat.
If you can't understand that the systematic behavior of the universe is organ-like in nature then I must ask, what the fuck did you learn?
How to get gobbies from alter-boys?

Because the lines between religious and non-religious should be a blur if you truly saw.
The harsh reality of god is of torment.

>>74383063
>It's hard to admit the malevolent nature.
Not hard at all. It' s hard not to notice it. Nature is malevolent, not beneficial. Otherwise we didn' t have to struggle that much to survive. There is a famous Italian poet and phylosopher called Giacomo Leopardi that discussed the topic of malevolent nature a lot. It might be interesting
>But once you see macroscopically, the universe is almost organ-like in nature. It's a living thing.
I strongly disagree.

>>74383312
We're like mitochondria in a body anon.
That's the horrific reality of our universe. It's not literal, well from an immediate point of reference.

>>74383296
There is an enormous distincion between science and religion. Please, stop saying blasphemies. Sincerely, a chemestry student

>>74383296
Not at all - studying Divinity is a requirement as a Friar - it involves intense study of many kinds of theology. I'm just informing you that I've heard every argument and believed a good portion of them at one time or another

I don't know if you really believe the entire universe is 'organ-like', I'm at a loss as to what that statement means to be honest. Maybe some specifics? The universe is basically organised entropy - uniformed randomness with rules governing the interactions over time; unless you've got a strong thesis on the comparisons please stop spouting drivel

>>74383328
Science has all tell tale signs of a cult.

But some cults are better tools than others.
The natural selection of memes is the reason why science was created. Prior to that, religious cults battled it out, forming stronger and stronger cults until we ended up with secular scientific society.
But science has this one flaw, disenchantment.
And that makes it dangerously blind to the teachings of old. It has failed to see that many of the moral values of the past became so because of the natural selection of those morals (i.e. the poor moral cults effectively or even literally died out).
Science will meet up with the old religious values one day. It's natural convergent evolution. It's ignoring the macroscopic far too much. It's not seeing the devil in the details.

>>74383350
>The universe is basically organised entropy - uniformed randomness
And we will also die one day anon. Did that thought never occur to you?

>>74383407
What point are you trying to make

>>74383378
By your own logic, the disintegration of religious morality in much of the western world; replaced as it is by secular beliefs, is just a continuation of this moral natural selection you talk about - it isn't separate from it

>>74382825
>Christian music sucks
>Bach sucks
kys

>>74383447
>What point are you trying to make
Entropy is death. No entropy. No death.
It's why we have to shit in the morning.

Hence the organ like nature of the universe.
Our communication with each other is effectively like a brain. This ability makes us distribute materials to places and people, just like how our nerve system makes our organs distribute chemicals to parts of our body.

>the disintegration of religious morality in much of the western world; replaced as it is by secular beliefs, is just a continuation of this moral natural selection you talk about - it isn't separate from it
Which is why the west is rapidly declining anon. It's dying. It's proving natural selection of memes.

>>74383378
You know whats the difference with other cults? That those are fake. But if you throw sodium in water you will always have an explosion. Always. That doesn' t change. Scientific phenomena are real and not man made. Cults are man made, such as every other cultural sovrastucture. Science is the mean to discover nature, and it' s man made and anthropocentric obviously. But science is not dogmatic. A theory (also, the word theory is scientific vocabulary doesn' t have the same meaning in everyday one, I hope you know it) is real until a better one is formed. It' s not stale as a cult. Putting science as a whole on the same level of a freakin random religious cult is utterly irrational.

>>74383462
Read again.

Old christian music, inspired christian music is great.
Modern christian music is shit.

Religions don't produce music, at least nowadays. There is of course traditional religious music, but nowadays there are secular gospel bands, Christian black metal bands, Jewish death metal bands, Muslim punk bands...

I'm into zen, so check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4cWu9A69Tk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq5XhOgyGnI

One of my favorite bands does happen to be Christian, though (Wovenhand)

>>74383508
Sorry about that, very tired atm

>>74383493
>Entropy is death. No entropy. No death.
It's why we have to shit in the morning.
You realise you say some really nutty things? I mean, completely meaningless half-riddles like this are just indecipherable. You're comparing organic death of living things to the heat 'death' of the universe as proof of a creator? If you're going to believe in God and want more sound reasoning at least study some theologians and get some more well reasoned arguments

>the west is rapidly declining
Of course you would think that as a religious nut - but most factors say otherwise

>>74379680
>liberal atheists

let me guess, >conservative atheists rare the one you don't like

what a fucking retard, seriously

>>74383501
>You know whats the difference with other cults? That those are fake
Exactly anon!
The only difference is that we, through confirmation bias and whatnot, say that science is the only thing correct.

The science of 100 years ago is probably very different to the science of today. That is because you will never ever discover the full truth of things, it's only a tool.
And that's why the disenchantment is dangerous. It's like leaping off a cliff into an abyss with no flashlight.

>Scientific phenomena are real and not man made.
Memes are man made. All science is memetic in nature.

>But science is not dogmatic.
No it is dogmatic like all religion, only the effects of science are more easily noticeable to a degree. But macroscopically it has fatal consequences.

>A theory (also, the word theory is scientific vocabulary doesn' t have the same meaning in everyday one, I hope you know it) is real until a better one is formed. It' s not stale as a cult.
Cults develop too anon. That's a delusion on your part.
In fact cults are beginning to match the speed of science (which is becoming increasingly dogmatic, increasingly biased, increasingly stale)

Learn this term. "Cognitive dissonance". Then learn "conditioning".
Well done, now you know why science is only slightly better than some cults in some ways, worse in others.

>Putting science as a whole on the same level of a freakin random religious cult is utterly irrational.
Science developed from religion. How is it irrational to mention their similarities? It is only natural for science to develop like religion, because it came from it.

>>74383587
>In fact cults are beginning to match the speed of science (which is becoming increasingly dogmatic, increasingly biased, increasingly stale)
Why do you keep stating your retarded opinions as facts? All you've presented is your own shaky reasoning without any compelling arguments, either theological or scientific - even religious leaders and scholars would disagree with most of this nonsense. What are these fatal consequences you speak of? Where is the evidence for them? And please present some facts instead of hearsay and truisms

Check out some theology too so you've got something semi-reasonable to fall back on

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/

File: Distance Between Us.jpg (43KB, 500x494px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x494px

Jewish occultism

>>74379548
Pagans

>>74383547
>You realise you say some really nutty things?
It's nuts because you're closed minded. You refuse to see it.

>I mean, completely meaningless half-riddles like this are just indecipherable.
I'll admit you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink.
Sorry was that "half-riddle" too confusing for you? That's a sign of slowness.

>You're comparing organic death of living things to the heat 'death' of the universe as proof of a creator?
No actually that one is literal. It's the same process that makes need to consume things in order to survive. We need energy to survive.
We need energy because entropy exists.

> If you're going to believe in God and want more sound reasoning at least study some theologians and get some more well reasoned arguments
From what I gathered from your posts that is a waste of time.
"If you have to ask you'll never know" sort of thing.

>Of course you would think that as a religious nut
>what is continuing economic decline
>what is this insistence on a ponzi-esque economic structure (finance major here - hah I have a degree too you dumb piece of shit)
>what is the replacement of the indigenous western demographic with foreign demographics
>what is the growing influence of religions such as islam on western society

I grew up from a house of athiests anon. I don't attend any cults, I just read all their texts. Even the satan ones. Then I combine it with my knowledge on science and mathematics. Then my knowledge on law and economics. There's a reason why I suddenly turned around from the position of my family. I saw the negative impact it had on them and society as a whole. I saw how they missed the macroscopic systematic requirements that religion used to provide.

>>74379707
Happy birthday

>>74379707
Your going to die here alone

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (58KB, 456x594px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 456x594px

actually it's scientology

>>74379548
none.

I'm surprised no one has said Hinduism yet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYzJuymjuvU

>>74383649
>Why do you keep stating your retarded opinions as facts?
Because they are facts and you're in denial.


>All you've presented is your own shaky reasoning without any compelling arguments, either theological or scientific - even religious leaders and scholars would disagree with most of this nonsense.
All you do is avoid asking things directly to the subject matter of what I was saying.

> What are these fatal consequences you speak of?
Death of a society. The fall of rome, the collapse of greece, the fall of babylon.
Which leads to starvation, disease, war, death.

Seriously this is all general knowledge. And if you need pin point references for everything then you are the reason why I am saying there is a huge flaw in science.
References lead to confirmation bias. All you need is a hysteric assumption and several "certified sources" that have that same assumption.
It's all a matter of who can bullshit the best.

Good link though.
I'll look into it, though I've probably read something from it or related to it. What matters is not the text, but the idea, the meme. That needs to get across. I try to do that as efficiently I can.

>>74383675
I'm the opposite of close-minded I've been devoutly religious for half of my life

>>74383675
>I'll admit you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink. Sorry was that "half-riddle" too confusing for you? That's a sign of slowness.

>From what I gathered from your posts that is a waste of time. "If you have to ask you'll never know" sort of thing.

The replies of some one with no credible refutation - face it, your arguments have been unpicked for the hollow nothings they are and you're trying to claw back some credibility by trying to infer that I know less than you on this subject (I don't).

If those points are the sum total of your economic degree I'm sorry for the time wasted.

>ponzi-esque economic structure
This is simply not the case

>what is continuing economic decline
There isn't one

>what is the replacement of the indigenous western demographic with foreign demographics
What has this got to do with decline - globalism is the next step socially and so this is to be expected

>what is the growing influence of religions such as islam on western society
What influence? What western Chrisitan society has been in anyway influenced by Islam, and don't just talk about Mosques being built or some other reductive rubbish

>>74383764
But there's nothing to ask, you just present your own made up ideas without scientific or religious backing; I'm trying to illicit some kind of more reasoned and thorough response from you in terms of your theory about organs and entropy as proof for God so we can at least have a discussion, but you have nothing, it's paper thin.

> What are these fatal consequences you speak of?
You're the bullshitter here - implying that previous societies and modern society are somehow following the same pattern; they aren't - the complexities of each individual decline are far too much to be generalised by your statement, but regardless you have presented any link between this society and those that hit a decline before hand. The only obvious decline in the Western world is that of Christianity, which will soon go the way of most Pagan religions - and thank god for that

>>74383778
>face it, your arguments have been unpicked for the hollow nothings they are and you're trying to claw back some credibility by trying to infer that I know less than you on this subject (I don't).
You haven't done shit anon. You need everything spelled out for you when you don't seem to understand that I've communicated enough to you for you to rationally work it out on your own.
A sign of autism.

In fact that explains a lot.
I've learned to read between the lines, you haven't.
Enough said. Bye.

>>74383587
>The only difference is that we, through confirmation bias and whatnot, say that science is the only thing correct.
Scientific theories are correct until alternatively proven. Scientifc phenomena are true because, well, they can' t be otherwise.
>The science of 100 years ago is probably very different to the science of today. That is because you will never ever discover the full truth of things, it's only a tool.
That' s called progress. I bet life was a bit different 100 years ago. Obviously it' s a tool. The only one that might lead us to something that can be called "full truth of things"
>Memes are man made. All science is memetic in nature
Modern Science is based on a thing called experimental method. Have a trip in Florence to thank Galileo Galilei.
>Cults develop too anon. That's a delusion on your part.
They develop too, right. Cults develop from wrong to still wrong. Scientific theories develop from "good experimental results" to "better experimental/theoretic results". (Or from totally wrong to a little bit better; just have a look to the atom shape theories)
>In fact cults are beginning to match the speed of science (which is becoming increasingly dogmatic, increasingly biased, increasingly stale)
If you think science is getting dogmatic and stale, I doubt you have a vague idea of what is scientific research. Recently they found experimental proof of a particle that was theorised back in the days. Well, if that is stale...
>Science developed from religion. How is it irrational to mention their similarities? It is only natural for science to develop like religion, because it came from it.
I would say from phylosphy rather than religion. Anyway religion is based on stuff you can' t measure, its not bases on the material world. Science is based on that. You cant compare them.

>>74383852
I know your pride must be hurt but hopefully you'll go away and do some research and come back the more reasoned and credible for it. I bet you're typing all that stuff with this horrible feeling in your gut that you know you don't really believe what you're saying and you know that your arguments don't really have any weight or merit but yet you feel you've got to make them anyway; suppressing that encroaching dread that you've no idea what the fuck you're talking about. I've been there too, you'll grow out of it if you let yourself

>>74383836
>you just present your own made up ideas without scientific or religious backing
>argument is literally about the flaws of referencing

Can't you see the conflict of interest? How that's impossible?
It's like describing the colour red to a blind man. You either get it, or you don't.
The sound of silence.

>implying that previous societies and modern society are somehow following the same pattern; they aren't
You're the idiot. Not me.
How the fuck can you say things don't have patterns of behavior, yet espouse your verbal diarrhea about "science being perfect". Do you even understand what people do when they "do science"? They relate things to past behaviour. To patterns of behaiviour. Things will ALWAYS have a cyclical pattern to a degree.

You ever heard of that little band called "Nirvana", well guess why the hindus thought it existed relative to Samsara - because they saw the cyclical pattern of nature. How it always has patterns of repetition. Convergent evolution is one example of how these patterns repeat.

God dammit I came here for music, now I'm chasing rabbits down holes again. Thanks cunt.

>>74379665
How do you believe in something through choice alone without feeling like you're lying to yourself?

>>74383903
>I know your pride must be hurt
Doesn't exist. You're the one that one taste the wind for the salt.
You probably don't even get that.

>>74383966
That goes for both science and religion.
Science dazzles it up and makes it look "professional".

File: 1498539473104.jpg (258KB, 492x1025px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 492x1025px

non-practicing Lutheranism

>>74383946
I never said science was perfect you tool.

My argument is not about the flaws of referencing either

I've no idea what you're talking about

But you're wrong about comparing the decline of civilizations, each individual case has a myriad of factors that are mostly incomparable, and our current society is the most complex in history so whatever barometer you're using in your assertion that our current society is declining is most likely broken

>>74383976
I'm not anti religion or anything.
That being said, beliefs based in what people have observed to be true and beliefs based in what people want to be true are two different things.

>>74384009
>My argument is not about the flaws of referencing either
You were talking about what my argument was.
Mine is about the fundamental logic of reference.

We won't ever agree anon, because we use different fundamental methods of investigation and reference.
What I say won't ever make a peer-reviewed journal. As I said, that is like a "passage of rite" that immediately closes out any alternative forms of investigation.

Can't you see this is why we won't agree?

>>74379677
This, coming from an atheist.

>>74384009
(con't)
I can't explain what I mean because we're speaking different languages.
Hence the "riddles". It gets beyond the fundamental basic for of words. I spoke in a manner that "added flavors" that act as a compass to get you to your destination.
But it's up to you to get it.

What I don't like is this "well I got a bit of toilet paper with cleaner shit than your toilet paper" attitude that you have (talking about that "masters" comment, assuming you are that anon..).
I came here to throw ideas on a wall and you're there drawing dicks on it.

>>74383976
>Science dazzles it up and makes it look "professional".

My god you actually retarded.

>>74382767
If you can't explain it to him then why should he believe it? Hell is just a way for people to join your religion out of fear.

>>74384174
I used to say the same thing.
But then you see how science has changed over the years and you soon realize that it is the truth. One day all the science you know now will not be science, but "past misjudgments and misunderstandings" or falsehoods.
All the medicine you use works not because of the reasons we currently know, we use it "cause it works".
Science is a modern version of religion. A tool. That's all it is.

>>74384217
>If you can't explain it to him then why should he believe it?
Because otherwise I'll steal his lunch money and rape his dog.

:^)

>>74384268
Really? So science from the past is wrong? Newton? Faraday? Pasteur? Einstein?
I'd rather accept the evidence that is available now on the off chance that some things I will believe might be wrong than believe something that has absolutely no evidence.
Remember that all technological advancements of this era are due to people practicing science, not by praying.

>>74384268
>>74384480

Newtonian physics are still used today because even if we know that it's not general enough to describe many phenomena, it's still a good approximation for a lot of application. Science changes over the years, but that doesn't mean we have to piss on all the foundations.
Same shit with the Ancient Greeks. We may know that Aristotle's model of the universe was pretty bullshit, but they still realized the earth wasn't flat.


Anyway, thanks to Newton, we know that the world will end before the end of the century.

>>74384480
>>74384638
If this post is still up in the morn I'll respond.

But I got work in the morn and my eyes are drifting to sleep.
Sorry for being an impatient arguing fuckwit but it ain't an argument until you call them a cunt 5 times and babble on. Adios.

>>74379548
Islam

Historically, Christianity, but it got pozzed so it's now dethroned by Hinduism.