MovieChat Forums > degree7 > Replies
degree7's Replies
The sound is the reason they were so big. NO one had heard anything like it before. They basically invented the modern rock/pop format that is still in use today. Think of your ten favourite bands, and guaranteed the majority of them are going to credit the Beatles as a major influence.
<blockquote>Don't like the sound, that's why.</blockquote>
So you're going to write off an entire music genre because you don't like Lil Wayne and Snoop Dogg, who aren't even that representative of hip hop. Okayyy then.
<blockquote>I think the hype was more about the hype than it was about their actual sound</blockquote>
Nah, they revolutionized rock music, for too many reasons that I couldn't possible all go into here.
<blockquote>but other artists broke ground too, without being credited with the collossal success the beatles had</blockquote>
No band broke ground to the extent that the Beatles did. All the ones that came after would credit the Beatles with their initial success. The Beatles are the big bang of rock and pop music. After Elvis.
<blockquote>But mostly their sound is lame. "I want to hold your haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnndd" lmao</blockquote>
For one, you need to look past the lyrics. Lyrics are basically meaningless. Their sound was that of American culture being shifted on its head by the British Invasion and kicking in the door for everything that followed. I guess you had to be there.
I know, I hope he realized that he’d already lost before he started
Also you’re missing the obvious route to take in this, and point out that Jesus was a prophet in Islam and by mocking Jesus I’m attacking Islam as well. That would be a much better argument for you to use.
You’re like a crap Jesus, you just speak in parables.
Jeez you’re so hilarious. Haven’t seen that insult before.
If Jesus existed historically, he wouldn’t have been referred to as a Jew at the time, but as a Galilean or Israelite. The idea of being a Jew or Jewish only came about in the fourth century AD.
Last word creep
Unfortunately you’re projecting your own unwarranted and irrelevant political views onto scientific research, which means your comment has no credibility at all.
More like I get an annoying notification and know you just have to get the last word in. But I’ll deny you that.
I don't think about you at all.
I never said the Hadiths are "fake," I said they're unreliable when trying to understand Muhammad as a historical figure. Because they were written <b>centuries after his death.</b> Big difference.
<blockquote> since Sharia Law is based largely on the writings in the Hadiths.</blockquote>
Okay, what does this have to do with slavery?
<blockquote>The Luke 12:47-48 verse is totally irrelevant and a massive cherry pick since its a parable</blockquote>
It's a parable about condoning the beating of slaves. You can try to spin it or extrapolate it any which way you want through various contortions, but at the end of the day it says what it says. Being in denial isn't going to help you. Saying that "it's a metaphor" is a copout. Either the religion is meant to be taken seriously or it isn't.
Besides which, the rest of the Bible condones slavery as well. Leviticus 25:44, 1 Timothy 6:1, 1 Petter 2:18, Ephesians 6:5 and the entirety of Exodus 21 are not parables.
<blockquote>since its obvious you have never read </blockquote>
Yeah, reading the literal text in front of me that visibly condones beating slaves sure is hard. For you maybe.
<blockquote>I never understood what the fuss was all about. </blockquote>
Well let's see, other than basically inventing an entire genre of music and changing the face of pop culture, I guess I can't see either.
<blockquote>that was more of a business and producing genius thing than musical.</blockquote>
The Beatles broke a lot of ground musically. Their use of three part harmony, their musicianship, their introduction of new instruments into the pop landscape, but mostly their incredible songwriting.
Wow you're such a snob. You can like classical, jazz, as well as pop music you curmudgeon. They're not mutually exclusive. In fact, Paul McCartney even talked about this very subject in detail.
And water is wet.
i thought of this idea when I was in gradeschool. Probably the lamest idea you could base a movie on.
Again, no Islamic countries practice slavery as an institution like you say, except for maybe one outlier. I don't know why you're trying to conflate slavery with Sharia Law when you clearly said one has nothing to do with the other. What exactly is the point of that paragraph?
Also no, I didn't just pick one verse that DEFINITELY condones beating slaves. There were others like Luke 12:47-48. In fact, the Apostle Paul was a big promoter of slavery. Frankly, it's all over both the Old and New Testament if you open your eyes.
<blockquote>Your argument is based on pure cherry-picking and ignoring everything that might be unfavourable to your argument.</blockquote>
Ahhh, pot meet kettle. Feel good to be a hypocrite? I'm not the one trying to argue slavery doesn't exist in a specific set of scripture here.
No, it's not "pretty clear." Considering that Muhammad was already dead long after that was written, so it's not his words. You're going to say only Islam had a bunch of racist asshats writing scripture? Nice joke. Anyway, no Islamic nation actually practices slavery, other than one or maybe two, and plenty of "secular" countries do as well. So I don't see your point. Saying it's part of Sharia Law is a non-sequitur.
It's also pretty ironic that you would say it's "misrepresenting scripture" when that's exactly what you've been doing this whole time. The Exodus 21:12 clearly says that if the slave manages to "survive for a day or two" after being beaten with a rod then no punishment is given "for the slave is his money." That clearly condones beating slaves. So really, the only reason the Slave-owner would be punished would be for destruction of property. Not exactly a humane law.
The point is that slavery was common in all cultures and pigeonholing one as being worse than the other in this regard is just wrong.
Nolan's only good movie is Memento
The Hadiths are not the word of Muhammad. They are the equivalent of Chinese whispers collected decades, even centuries after his death. If you want the true word on slavery then you would be best looking at the Quran. Numerous quotes make reference to freeing slaves who believe in Allah, and allowing owners to free their slaves (Q 2.177, 4.92; 58.3, and 24.33). There is never a moment in the Quran where Muhammad "equates slaves to animals." That is just something you made up.
Also the Bible easily condones and promotes owning slaves. For one, it is recommended that slave-owners beat their slaves (Exodus 21:10-21 & Luke 12:47-48), and for : “Bondservants, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5).
I will rip out your spine and beat your soul with it