hey guys.... if you dont belive, ur gonna go to hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

I cant see why people dont just believe?

all these christians are here, proving evoluction is wrong, why dont you just acept it and give ur life to christ?

its better then hell isnt it? if you dont listen to me, you wuill realy regrett it later on....

[---Beany---]

I'm not saying I know it all, but I know enough to know that you don't what your talking about.

What about the other religeons who also accept christ and god?

quote:Originally posted by ---Beany---:

I'm not saying I know it all, but I know enough to know that you don't what your talking about.

What about the other religeons who also accept christ and god?

wat non christian religon excepts jesus as teh son of god who died for out sins?

Fine, send me to hell than.

'Believing' something for the sole purpose of not going to hell has got to be the shiziest cause for mass conversion in the history of missionary-ism

[icantthinkofaname]

quote:

hey guys.... if you dont belive, ur gonna go to hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh well...

After reading up on a little bit of quantum physics I think that there is a god. However, I just don't believe anyone who tries to explain something that everyone just has ideas about. If I'm going to hell for questioning what you and others say of God, fine.

[truckfixr]

quote:Originally posted by mastahboi:

I cant see why people dont just believe?

all these christians are here, proving evoluction is wrong, why dont you just acept it and give ur life to christ?

its better then hell isnt it? if you dont listen to me, you wuill realy regrett it later on....

The only thing Christians have been able to prove , is that they are gullible enough to believe the misrepresentations of fact, half-truths, and outright lies presented by the Creation Scientists.

The greatest majority of people,Christian and non-Christian alike , don't even know what evolution actually is or how it really works. The Creationists use this lack of knowledge to their advantage .

You cannot prove that God exists.Therefor you cannot prove the validity of the bible (including heaven and hell) or any other religious text.Your faith is based on HOPE.

I cannot prove that God does not exist.I can however, prove that the bible(and all other religious texts)were written by men. Without proof of the existance of God,I cannot accept devine inspiration as the source of these texts.

I don't lose any sleep over the possibility of ending up in a hell that I don't believe exists.

"I cant see why people dont just believe?

all these christians are here, proving evoluction is wrong, why dont you just acept it and give ur life to christ?

its better then hell isnt it? if you dont listen to me, you wuill realy regrett it later on...."

People don't believe because of dipshit christians like yourself.^_- People can't just snap their fingers and suddenly believe in something. And evolution isn't "wrong". I believe that God created this and all other worlds, but to believe that no species on earth, including man, hasn't evolved since the Creation is pure idioticy.No one is going to serve the Lord because of your weak argument especially when it is combined with extremely loose spelling/punctuation.

He must be right!!!!! Look at all the!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'s



!!!!!!!!!!!&11

This thread is being hjacked!!! Bend OVER!



History of Jazz and Classical Music

Upon entering a modern record store, one is confronted with a

wide variety of choices in recorded music. These choices not only

include a multitude of artists, but also a wide diversity of music

categories. These categories run the gamut from easy listening dance

music to more complex art music. On the complex side of the scale are

the categories known as Jazz and Classical music. Some of the most

accomplished musicians of our time have devoted themselves to a

lifelong study of Jazz or Classical music, and a few exceptional

musicians have actually mastered both. A comparison of classical and

Jazz music will yield some interesting results and could also lead to

an appreciation of the abilities needed to perform or compose these

kinds of music.

Let's begin with a look at the histories of the two. The music

called classical, found in stores and performed regularly by

symphonies around the world, spans a length of time from 1600 up to

the present. This time frame includes the Renaissance, Baroque,

Classical, Romantic and Contemporary periods. The classical period of

music actually spans a time from of 1750 to 1800; thus, the term

Classical is a misnomer and could more correctly be changed to Western

Art Music or European Art Music. European because most of the major

composers up till the 20th century were European. Vivaldi was Italian,

Bach was German, Mozart and Beethoven were Austrian; they are some of

the more prominent composers. Not until the twentieth century with

Gershwin and a few others do we find American composers writing this

kind of art music. For the sake of convention, we can refer to Western

Art Music as Classical music.

Jazz is a distinctively American form of music, and it's history

occupies a much smaller span of time. Its origins are found in the

early 1900s as some dance band leaders in the southern U.S. began

playing music that combined ragtime and blues. Early exponents of this

dance music were Jelly Roll Martin (a blues player) and Scott Joplin

(ragtime). The terms "Jazz" and "Jazz Band" first surfaced in the year

1900. Some say this occurred in New Orleans, although similar music

was played at the same time in other places. The most prominent

exponents of this early music, called Dixieland Jazz, included Louis

Armstrong and Sidney Bechet. After World War I, Jazz music had evolved

and was aided by the development of the recording industry. The

small dance band ensemble grew into the larger orchestra known as the

"Big Band". The music of the Big Bands became known as "Swing." Two of

the more famous Swing band leaders were Tommy Dorsey and Harry James.

In the late 40s and through the 50s, a different kind of Jazz became

popular. This music, played by a very small ensemble, was much more

sophisticated and complex . Its rich harmonic changes and melodic

counterpoint were not conducive to dance. It became known as "Bop,"

with Charlie Parker and Dizzie Gillespie being the early proponents.

In the last twenty years there has been a combination of Jazz with

popular music of the US and Latin America. This modern Jazz music has

been called "Fusion." Present day exponents include Pat Metheny and

Chic Corea. There has also been a return to the sound of Bop in the

last ten years by such musicians as trumpeter Winton Marsalis and his

brother Branford, a saxophonist.

Let's focus on the instrumentation of the two kinds of music. In

Classical music, both large orchestras and small ensembles are used.

But generally, the greatest and most prominent compositions are for

the larger symphony orchestra. The largest part of the orchestra is

the string section consisting of violins, violas, cellos and string

basses. These instruments were invented very early in medieval times

but really matured into their present form during the late 18th

century. The wind instruments, comprised of brass and woodwinds, took

longer to mature. The brass section in particular did not posses the

ability to play chromatically (in all keys) until the advent of valves

which allowed the length of the instrument to be changed while

playing. This occurred around the middle to late 19th century.

Consequently, the brass instruments are less prominent in the music of

Bach, Mozart and Beethoven along with their contemporaries. Late 19th

and early 20th century composers make use of a very large orchestra

with all the fully developed wind instruments. Some of the master

orchestrator/composers of this time were: Wagner, Rimskey-Korsakov,

Ravel and Stravinsky. Currently, composers also make use of the full

orchestra but with the addition of increasingly larger percussion

sections which add many unique and unheard of sounds than in earlier

music.

Early Jazz music was played in small ensembles making use of

clarinet, tuba, cornet, baritone, drums, and piano. Dixieland groups

of New Orleans had similar instrumentation. During the Swing era,

larger groups were employed to achieve more of an orchestral sound.

The Big Bands of the this era were predominantly wind orchestras

containing alto and tenor sax sections, trumpet and trombone sections,

along with piano and drums. When Bop music arrived, the alto saxophone

and trumpet were the preferred instruments of the major soloists who

were backed up by piano, string bass and drums. With the advent of

Fusion, electric instruments such as the electric guitar and keyboard

synthesizer became prominent.

How has each of these kinds of music been transmitted to later

generations of musicians? Early in the evolution of classical music, a

system of notation was gradually developed which for the most part

remained stable from the Renaissance on. This gave the composer

control over how his compositions were to be played. Throughout the

history of Jazz, however, notation was more like a rough sketch. This

was because the syncopated rhythms of ragtime and the melodic riffs of

the blues were not easily notated. Also, early Jazz musicians were not

formally trained; they usually learned by ear. Some songs were

transcribed and written down, but not in precise ways. Jazz music

became more of a passed on tradition that a musician learned through

interaction with other players. In a similar way, the modern Jazz

musician must rely on previous recordings to get a feel for the

style and technique which he desires to learn from. But in classical

music, one composer can learn from an older composer by looking at and

analyzing the music that the previous composer wrote down. Likewise,

classical musicians can master the parts they must play by practicing

the music that has been written or published beforehand. These two

approaches to passing on tradition are both valid. However, without

the recording medium Jazz music might have developed much differently

than it has.

The cohesive element that keeps a musical group together is also

an interesting contrast. In Classical music, the conductor uses a

baton and plays the orchestra as if it were his instrument; he looks

at a complete score of all the events happening in the composition and

interprets these events based on his knowledge and intuition of what

the composer intended. Jazz groups rarely utilize conductors. The

swing era employed them for the sake of keeping the larger sized group

together but other jazz styles did not and do not to this day. The

drummer of the Jazz ensemble provides the beat that keeps the group

together but even he is interacting with the other soloists as the

song is performed.

Perhaps the most interesting point of comparison between the two

types of music is in improvisation. Improvisation is the ability to

play and compose spontaneously "on the spot" while the music is

playing. This has been an important element of Jazz from it's

inception. Although improvisation was less prominent during the swing

era, it regained importance with Bop and onward. Early Jazz was

improvised, using ragtime and blues as a loose structure. In the swing

era, popular songs were arranged by an arranger and soloists played

improvisations over the repeating sections in order to lengthen the

song for dancing. With the advent of Bop, improvisation assumed great

importance. The musicians memorized the chord changes to a song, along

with the melody, but then played very loosely and in the end

substituted new chords along with greatly embellishing the original

melody to the point of being unrecognizable. These factors, along with

the ability to interact with each other, became important and remains

so in the Fusion music of today.

In Classical music, modern listeners are mostly unaware of the

fact that many of the great composers of the past were not only

excellent performers but also great improvisers. Starting with J.S.

Bach (1685-1750), the greatest composer of the Baroque era, he in fact

made his living through his great skill as an improvisor. It was

common for the Lutheran Church organist of his day be able to

improvise on choral melodies and Bach was considered one of the

greatest at this. There are written accounts of other composers

improvisational abilities including Mozart (1756-1791), Beethoven

(1770-1829), and Franz Liszt (1811-1886). Yet, as time went on,

improvising gave way to the composer's desire to exert complete

control over his music. By the late 19th century, improvising was rare

and not used at all in public performances of classical music.

In summation, we can say that Jazz and Classical music represent

two approaches to Art Music. The Classical composer or performer has a

long and rich body of music in written form that he uses to learn from

while the Jazz musician uses a body of recorded music to learn.

Because of it's small size, the modern Jazz ensemble allows loose

interaction while the symphony orchestra's large size and diversity of

instruments provides many different sounds and wide dynamic range. In

classical music the composer strives for control; he uses printed

music to guide and direct the musicians through the conductor. In Jazz

music, the songs are loosely composed, thus forming a basis for

individual expression within an ensemble. When you go to hear a

symphony, you hear an orchestra conducted by the conductor playing a

composition. When you go to a Jazz club you hear a small jazz ensemble

interacting and improvising a song. Both of these kinds of music

provide rich expression and detail to the serious listener. They take

different paths to reach their final form but give a person equal

opportunities to appreciate the creative output of each.

[truckfixr]

quote:Originally posted by Asheville:

This thread is being hjacked!!! Bend OVER!



History of Jazz and Classical Music

Upon entering a modern record store, one is confronted with a ...

...provide rich expression and detail to the serious listener. They take

different paths to reach their final form but give a person equal

opportunities to appreciate the creative output of each.

Your post is more interesting than the original subject.

[Dazzle]

Better to reign in hell then serve in heaven... Fuck you...

quote:Originally posted by mastahboi:

I cant see why people dont just believe?

all these christians are here, proving evoluction is wrong, why dont you just acept it and give ur life to christ?

its better then hell isnt it? if you dont listen to me, you wuill realy regrett it later on....

I'm Christian, and all i have to say is that your wrong. Why should people believe in something when they don't want to??

quote:Originally posted by mastahboi:

wat non christian religon excepts jesus as teh son of god who died for out sins?

Damn it I know there is one they have like a million damn gods and jesus is one of them I dont rember the name but because of their philosophy they had no problem accepting jesus along with all the other gods

well, this website, http:../../www.youthinchrist.da.ru/default.htm

should explain things for you.

[---Beany---]

quote:Originally posted by mastahboi:

wat non christian religon excepts jesus as teh son of god who died for out sins?

Many Indian religeons accept that various incarnations of God appeared on Earth, such as Jesus, Buddha, Krishna as a means of showing us the way back to god.

You're right, Jesus is the way, but not the only way. Just one of the quicker ways. And you don't go to heaven simply by believing in him. Your spiritual growth is faster if you follow his examples and understand his teachings.

[This message has been edited by ---Beany--- (edited 06-20-2004).]

He never said he was the way, and he never called himself god.

quote:Originally posted by mastahboi:

I cant see why people dont just believe?

all these christians are here, proving evoluction is wrong, why dont you just acept it and give ur life to christ?

its better then hell isnt it? if you dont listen to me, you wuill realy regrett it later on....

Now, you'll go to Hell. Hurry up and bag my groceries.

How could I go to places that don't exist?

Have you ever considered the fact that non-believers also don't believe they are going to hell?

[Brady]

Judging by your grammar, spelling, and username, I'm gonna go ahead and place your age at somewhere around 12-14. While its real nice of you to try save me from certain damnation, I would much rather take spiratual advice from somewhere slightly older and whos been living with their faith and developing it for years, not some stupid little "saved" 13 year old whos been brainwashed by his parents since he could talk. Fuck off, you stupid little shit.

I'm assuming he's a Ruskie.

[Aphelion Corona]

quote:Originally posted by CukieMunster:

How could I go to places that don't exist?

Shrooms?

quote:Originally posted by Aphelion Corona:

Shrooms?

hahaha, classic

mastahboi if your an example of the type of people going to heaven please send me to hell!!!!!!!!!!(there my post is now as urgent as yours)

i won't listen to someone with the username "mastahboi"

quote:Originally posted by truckfixr:



The only thing Christians have been able to prove , is that they are gullible enough to believe the misrepresentations of fact, half-truths, and outright lies presented by the Creation Scientists.

The greatest majority of people,Christian and non-Christian alike , don't even know what evolution actually is or how it really works. The Creationists use this lack of knowledge to their advantage .

You cannot prove that God exists.Therefor you cannot prove the validity of the bible (including heaven and hell) or any other religious text.Your faith is based on HOPE.

I cannot prove that God does not exist.I can however, prove that the bible(and all other religious texts)were written by men. Without proof of the existance of God,I cannot accept devine inspiration as the source of these texts.

I don't lose any sleep over the possibility of ending up in a hell that I don't believe exists.

well you saved me some time on typing. furthermore, i would like to say: i believe that religion was just made as a crude form of law, that would make people stay in line.

[LostCause]

This has gone on long enough.

Cheers,

Lost