"Imagine" rewritten as a Gospel song

I dont force my children to tell them they love me under penalty. A true god would know and not need such a trait such as vanity. Isnt vanity a sin?

 

We pray to Him for our own benefit.

 

Who said anything about force? The question was asked if I pray. I answered yes. Then you were asked if your children tell you that they love you in spite of you already knowing that they love you. Now all of a sudden you want to speak about how you don't 'force your children to express their love under a condition of 'force' via a penalty. Why are you so grotesquely changing the parameters of this discussion?

 

Why do you need to pray to a god for your benefit? If god is onniscient then prayer wouldnt be necessary.

 

Im not...you are as usual when I crush your argument. Yawn..off to the political threads now.

 

Crush my argument? Not hardly... all you did was present something that was not even being discussed. Try again.

 

Try what again? Ive already asked why you need to pray to an omniscient god. You then started blurting about children telling me they love me. Its rather amusing watching people back pedal on their religion but its gets boring because its too easy.

 

Try a different declaration because you certainly have not crushed my argument. Have a nice evening.

 

John is spinning in his grave so rapidly that we could use him as a generator.

 

Actions speak louder than words.

 

Sharon Irving has a terrific voice but that was not a very good rendition of that song.

[video=youtube;3vBfte52HTI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vBfte52HTI[/video]

 

to get the placebo effect, you have to pray and believe it will work.....

 

Are you saying a devout atheist would have lost also for singing badly?
My point is no theist should ever sing that song, unless they adjust it as I did.

 

No, I am saying that was a bad rendition of the song. It is about the arrangement nothing more.

Fortunately for the world, you are not our dictator, musical or otherwise. I am sure that many atheists have sung U2's Still Haven't Found What I am looking For. Should they be executed, imprisoned, ticketed, or just given a stern talking to?

 

So you're saying that atheists have given up searching for something? John Lennon certainly never stopped searching for something, and it's hard to assess him as anything but atheist.
The lyrics to imagine not only endorse atheism but anarchism.
As for the arrangement of songs, I don't even know what that means. I have no objection to the notes. as an instrumental that never had lyrics it's with Mozart.
Lyrics are what matters to me and I prefer songs I understand. I understand "Imagine" as an atheist anarchist anthem.
I'll try to locate and post my comedy routine in which I address the lyrics point by point. I'm proud of the ending.

 

Mmmmkay you too

 

Thats a response not an answer. The question still stands. Last time I will ask for a cogent response. So make it count.

 

I still haven't Found What I am looking For was written as a gospel song.

Sounds like it endorses sitting around daydreaming. Very The Secret Life of Walter Mitty that one is.

That you think it is comparable to Mozart is odd.

And the singer seems to "understand" it differently.

So this thread is about your comedy routine and not the singer singing Imagine?

 

I gave you the answer. You were just unsatisfied with it.

 

Let's go backwards through your 4 comments.
This thread is about the idiocy of thinking that a song is a Gospel song just because it uses the word Heaven once. The first 40 posts had nothing to do with Lennon, little with music and little with me. You notice my second post came when someone finally started talking about music. In the past I wrote a serious essay about the lyrics. I don't know where that is right now. Several months ago I wrote a comedy routine called "songs that make Phillip sick." Imagine comes last and if you read it you'll see it had to. Lennon lived long enough to explain his lyrics. Did he? 2 years before he died I still didn't know the difference between John and Nikolai Lenin.
Who says I love Mozart? I'm just thinking that if I heard the tune, never knowing there were lyrics, then heard 3 consecutive minutes of one of Mozarts solo instrumentals I would like them about equally. I might have said Bach but not Handel, DeBussey but not Dvorjak.
In other words, it's a nice tune hampered by disturbing lyrics, hampered further by the biography of the author.
Now your first line:
If that means you agree with me that he misunderstands reality, you can now take this thread in any relevant direction and I will cheerfully respond.
For the moment, let's get simple.
If you think the world would be better if there was no Heaven or Hell, you're an atheist.
If you think the world would be better if there were no countries, you're an anarchist.
If you think the world would be better if there were no possessions, you're a Communist.
If you're a Christian you think the world is better with Heaven and Hell and consensus agreement on how to get to either place.
If you're a Christian you think the world would be better with one country and Jesus as king.
If you're Christian you may be compatible with shared possessions, but not imposed by a government that forces you to renounce Christianity.
If you're Christian you look forward to the Millennial Kingdom with peace.
See the difference!

 

No you gave a response as I already told you. Here I will illustrate...what is 1+1?
Answer:2
Response: pizza

 

Whatever you say.

 

Well thank you.

 

Why? Theists must only sing songs that meet your approval?

 

No, theists should only sing songs that meet the approval of their chosen deity. My chosen deity, and presumably that person's does not approve of that song because it says we'd all be better off without that deity and most of what he represents. Please don't argue percentages.