Paladin Dave
The Beauty's Beast
- Aug 30, 2004
- 24,179
- 494
- 37
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Well, to be perfectly and politely honest, I think you may be misinterpreting my meaning just a little bit. I know I was pretty heated nigh on ten years ago against Talitha, but it wasn't because my emotions were raw.
I feel I should clarify. NW was my favorite band, and no one has really risen up to take that title in those 10 years, but their last 3 albums didn't hold me as well. I say this to lend you some context when I say, I don't and never did worship them in any sense of the word, didn't think them perfect, and they certainly weren't a sacred cow, if you catch my meaning. I had friends who didn't like NW, and I didn't begrudge them that. Listened to people trash-talk them in old "Who's your favorite band" threads and such, usually kept my mouth shut unless it was to inform them, "No, NW is in fact NOT copying Evanescence, and were around several years prior." XD
I've rewritten what would've been this paragraph about 5 times now, and I think all I can say is this. I was upset with Talitha not because of her message, but because of how she presented it. She probably did mean to help people, and I can appreciate that. She probably didn't mean to come across as being nasty or anything, or realize that her experience with another band wouldn't be taken as proof by strangers. That doesn't sound very forgiving on my end, but I'm not sure how else to express it. I don't know how much of that conversation you read, or if I can speak for her other detractors, but it wasn't her opinions that got her flack; it was how she expressed them, that she expressed them as fact even when we presented evidence to the contrary, and how she responded to us. For my part, I know I didn't help things by being a mouthy little teenage spitfire. But that's how it happened. We weren't flocking to defend a sacred cow, nor were we confronted with any sort of biblical reason it was bad for us; just that another band influenced her negatively, and that she was convinced it would do the same to us.
To that end, I have indeed studied and prayed to the point that I have my standards and principles concerning secular music pretty firmly established to a point that I am confident they don't negatively effect my spiritual life. And, no looking for deep meaning here, going literally by what is in that verse, I was indeed reading the scripture you quoted as meaning what it said. "That which is not against me is for me" literally means that if something is not done FOR God, but it isn't done AGAINST him, then it falls back into the FOR category. How are we reading outside the lines here?
I feel I should clarify. NW was my favorite band, and no one has really risen up to take that title in those 10 years, but their last 3 albums didn't hold me as well. I say this to lend you some context when I say, I don't and never did worship them in any sense of the word, didn't think them perfect, and they certainly weren't a sacred cow, if you catch my meaning. I had friends who didn't like NW, and I didn't begrudge them that. Listened to people trash-talk them in old "Who's your favorite band" threads and such, usually kept my mouth shut unless it was to inform them, "No, NW is in fact NOT copying Evanescence, and were around several years prior." XD
I've rewritten what would've been this paragraph about 5 times now, and I think all I can say is this. I was upset with Talitha not because of her message, but because of how she presented it. She probably did mean to help people, and I can appreciate that. She probably didn't mean to come across as being nasty or anything, or realize that her experience with another band wouldn't be taken as proof by strangers. That doesn't sound very forgiving on my end, but I'm not sure how else to express it. I don't know how much of that conversation you read, or if I can speak for her other detractors, but it wasn't her opinions that got her flack; it was how she expressed them, that she expressed them as fact even when we presented evidence to the contrary, and how she responded to us. For my part, I know I didn't help things by being a mouthy little teenage spitfire. But that's how it happened. We weren't flocking to defend a sacred cow, nor were we confronted with any sort of biblical reason it was bad for us; just that another band influenced her negatively, and that she was convinced it would do the same to us.
To that end, I have indeed studied and prayed to the point that I have my standards and principles concerning secular music pretty firmly established to a point that I am confident they don't negatively effect my spiritual life. And, no looking for deep meaning here, going literally by what is in that verse, I was indeed reading the scripture you quoted as meaning what it said. "That which is not against me is for me" literally means that if something is not done FOR God, but it isn't done AGAINST him, then it falls back into the FOR category. How are we reading outside the lines here?
Last edited:
Upvote
0