Dan, do you question existence?

I'm really suprised nobodies mentioned Dans original work with Edge of Sanity, here are his lyrics (co written with Axelsson) for Curfew For The Damned:

You true beiever. Die man deciever, for your prophecies. A fatal release. The temple of the holy. We will blaspheme. There are no blessings, only a dream. Christianity = Insanity. Just another sect. None shall resurrect. If once you have been 'signed' to the creator of mankind. You're
far beyond control captured soul. Light the candle. Light the lie. Yet another soul will die. The blessing that'll never come. Lies to us, truth to some. As I see the candles lightning up their 'sanctuaries'. When we die what happens only obituaries?? When only remains remain, and
noone's left to blame. All words are deiable, go and burn your bible. A curfew for the damned. A curfew for the
damned. (*) Realize, realize. A curfew for the damned. Real eyes. Realize a curfew for the damned. God is just a dream, kneeling at the altar of lies. Illusions of a false paradise. Deny the crucifixion of a their 'saviour' Jesus Christ. To the force of heaven, none was sacrificed. Their masses are all erratic ruled by a sick fanatic, possessed by demons (?) Scch! I hear cries of a human sacrifice, and when will it end?? A curfew for the damned.
 
exactly....

NO!!! HOW DO YOU DARE DOUBT DAN'S EVILNESS!!! HE IS THE TRUE SON OF SATAN ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!!

In fact, i know for a fact Dan had his own shrine in the unisound studios. before every recording, he would burn incense and worship satan, to make sure 't would be a good recording!
 
AnTz0r said:
exactly....

NO!!! HOW DO YOU DARE DOUBT DAN'S EVILNESS!!! HE IS THE TRUE SON OF SATAN ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH!!!

In fact, i know for a fact Dan had his own shrine in the unisound studios. before every recording, he would burn incense and worship satan, to make sure 't would be a good recording!

I thought Mike Akerfeldt was Satan's son
 
Tumn said:
They're only lyrics.
Yes, they are only lyrics but when bands speak against xtianity I believe (maybe I'm a fool) that they mean it. Dont quote me on that without the rest of this; in anti xtian lyrics those of us who write them usually do so because we stand against/disagree with that religion.

HOWEVER It doesnt mean we encourage killing christians but it does mean we dont like that religion. Sure there are some who write against the Church just to be cool and sell records but I would hope they are in the minority. I would also expect someone of Swano's reputation to be sincere but again maybe im wrong.

I dont wish to get in a debate with people about my beliefs but I will say im not someone who claims to worship Satan...
 
Tumn said:
Well, I am thinking they could be fun lyrics like Infestdead since Dan and Andreas were both apart of that as well.

Yeah, I think that's likely part of it. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan is lukewarm about organized religion, since he seems to play around with a lot of different myths / religious imagery in his music.

Besides, talking about him being pro / anti Christian as if those were the only two sides is a mistake. If don't consider yourself Christian, you probably don't even think about Christianity very much at all. I'm an atheist, but that doesn't mean I'm only not Christian. It means I don't believe in anything. Calling me anti-Christian, for example, would be untrue because I really don't feel strongly about it. Ask me about organized religion as a whole, then you might get a different answer. But even when talking about Christian fundamentalists, I would attribute that sort of behavior to social conservatism and politics rather than to religion.

Anyway, I wouldn't assume what Dan actually thinks about any of this, just my two cents on how we actually talk about it.
 
George said:
This is still going on? This was soo last month.

This thread is immortal. If it somehow will sink to the next page and maybe be forgotten you can be sure that in 6 months, or maybe a year or two, someone will dig it up, bump it just for the sake of it and give it life.

:erk:

I love paradoxiles posts and his South Park-obsession though. :dopey:
 
gar977 said:
Dan,

Nightingale is such a cool project-I wish you would do that and not the Bloodbath stuff. I'm way past that Satanic stuff.. Take it Ez- creator of the Karaboudjan :)
ummm not doing BLOODBATH would be lame.....bloodbath should forever live
 
Eesh.. look man, you're not making all that much sense. Secterian violence is not limited to Islam. You don't even need to go waaaaaay back to the Crusades to find an instance of violence of Christians against non-Christians. There's tons - too many - examples of religious violence by Christians in the 20th century. Maronites in the civil war in Lebanon, Christian / Buddhist violence in Vietnam, Christian fundamentalist rebels in Uganda, abortion clinic bombers in the US, Christian animists and Arab Muslims in Sudan, and even anti Semitism in Europe has religious roots. Terrorism rooted in Islamic fundamentalism is just more spectacular because it has a political message and its delivery (suicide bombings, beheadings) assures that it gathers a lot of attention. But I assure you that less people have died from terrorism in the last 10-15 years than people have died from routine secterian violence between Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, and others throughtout the world. All parties are equally guilty. You can't justify blaming any one side.

It's also problematic that you blame the religious beliefs of others for conflict. You have to understand something. You have a very SPECIFIC interpretation of what the "truth" is. Your very, very evident lack of meaningful knowledge of Islam or Catholicism causes you to make indefensible - and incorrect - statements about these religions. For example, you use the Islamic conquests as an example of Mohammed's "violence", yet you fail to mention the Roman Empire, in its Emperor Constantine end of days was a Christian empire that waged brutal war against its neighbors, in name of both the Empire and of Christianity. Jesus Christ may be the most important figure in Christianity, but many of the figures responsible for Christianizing the Western world used violence to ensure the spread of Christianity as a religion.

I think you need read a lot more about the ideas and religions you criticize, and not crazy propaganda pages set up by amatuers (such as that hilarious "truth about Islam" website). Pick up "The Prophet and the Age of Caliphates" by Hugh Kennedy if you're honestly interested in developing an understanding of early Islam. That's a good starting point and it has a very good bibliography, one that will allow you to explore the literature on the subject. You should know, and know well, that what exactly Islam is and what it is supposed to represent is hotly contested among Muslims, just like the meaning and essence of Christianity is contested by Christians. In spite of your assertions that Catholicism is not Christianity (which is a very radical, fundamentalist Christian argument that I do not see often from Protestants), you have to accept that whether you believe that or not is predicated precisely in your beliefs, and not in the question of whether or not Catholicism is a valid form of Christianity. >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

Can you give examples of violence for spreading Christianity in the western world? If you take a peak at the Koran-what does it tell you? Does promise of riches in heaven and sex with virgins after killing yourself sound like a good religion. Well, it doesnt to me. Im against anything that deviates from the bible and it includes Catholicism not just other religions. Sure, there are mad people in all religions. But, right action separates the good Christians from the tyrannical Christians. Rome was a pagan society also for years.. Ask was Constantine right in his actions? What was the real conflict.. Its interesting and I will read more into it. Christian/Budhist violence in Vietnam.. I can tell you the vietmanese are largely Catholic in the states-they buy these expensive statues and put them in front of their church like its part of worship! Wrong..
Well, my narrow interpretation is not of my own beliefs but the bible. The church should be as close as it should be to the 1st century churches that were started after Jesus influence. Nowadays, Catholics(the worst) and all denominations want to insert their own policies and creeds which is not good at all.
 
Well, I have to say Constantine was a little confused. Read on.. and you will have your explanation of his actions. Was he a Christian at all? It doesnt even look like it. He worshipped a sun god-very wrong!



It is regretable that many Catholics have been told that the Christian Church started with the Roman Catholic Church. The fact is that the Roman Catholic Church was not founded until AFTER the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

The position of the Bishop of Rome did exist a bit before the Council of Nicea. But it was a very different position, before Constantine and After Constantine.

It is routinely stated that Constantine was supposedly a convert to Christianity. But the facts do not support this - at least not until he was at death's door. According to what Eusebius, (the bishop of Constantine) he wrote that Constantine WANTED to become a Christian but Eusebius talked him out of it, suggesting that he delay until he was on his deathbed.

This is exactly what happened. For all of his life, Constantine was a worshipper of the Sun God Sol Invictus (better known as Mithras/Mitra). Catholics are often told that Constantine was converted by his vision of a cross. But a vision does not save anyone. Charles manson had visions, did that save him ?

The record of what Constantine saw when he supposedly saw his cross, was not a cross in anycase: The records very precisely describe what today is known as an "Egyptian Ankh", an egyptian symbol of paganism. At best, Constantine was a very confused person.
 
gar977 said:
Well, I have to say Constantine was a little confused. Read on.. and you will have your explanation of his actions. Was he a Christian at all? It doesnt even look like it. He worshipped a sun god-very wrong!



It is regretable that many Catholics have been told that the Christian Church started with the Roman Catholic Church. The fact is that the Roman Catholic Church was not founded until AFTER the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

The position of the Bishop of Rome did exist a bit before the Council of Nicea. But it was a very different position, before Constantine and After Constantine.

It is routinely stated that Constantine was supposedly a convert to Christianity. But the facts do not support this - at least not until he was at death's door. According to what Eusebius, (the bishop of Constantine) he wrote that Constantine WANTED to become a Christian but Eusebius talked him out of it, suggesting that he delay until he was on his deathbed.

This is exactly what happened. For all of his life, Constantine was a worshipper of the Sun God Sol Invictus (better known as Mithras/Mitra). Catholics are often told that Constantine was converted by his vision of a cross. But a vision does not save anyone. Charles manson had visions, did that save him ?

The record of what Constantine saw when he supposedly saw his cross, was not a cross in anycase: The records very precisely describe what today is known as an "Egyptian Ankh", an egyptian symbol of paganism. At best, Constantine was a very confused person.

Constantine Christianized the Roman Empire. Christianity was an upstart religion, not a the religion par excellance of the Roman Empire, until he made it so. In the canon of Western Civilization Constantine is the one credited with Christianizing Rome, which had grave implications in terms of the empire's elite (as a friend of mine claims, it was the beginning of the breakdown of Rome's aristocracy, which was replaced by the budding Christian bureaucracy).

I don't understand why you would impose modern Evangelical Christian standards of who is Christian on a person living in 330 AD in your efforts to judge whether they were Christian or not. The type of Christian living you're imagining did not exist back then - for anyone. That's why Christ, and other religious figures, are significant. They provide examples of an alternate ways of living and thinking. Constantine, if he worshipped a pagan (indeed the Sun God Mithras, championed by Aurelian as an alternative to Christianity), he would have done so because that was common back then; he could not have lived the type of life you consider most righteous, because that example did not exist (and don't say Jesus, because in 330 AD they were still tinkering with the Bible).

Also,Constantine worshipped Mithras in his early years, but he converted to Christianity fairly early. He converted after he defeated his main opponent to the throne in 313 at the Milvian bridge, outside of Rome. He wasn't BAPTIZED until his deathbed because most of his subjects were pagan, and did not want to alienate them. But it was Constantine that started the process that made Christianity the state religion the end of the 4th century.

And for your information, Martyrdom is a Christian idea. It did not originate in Islam. And unlike some Evangelical Christians, not all Muslims believe you're supposed to take the Koran literally. I don't know why you keep making these generalizations. I'm not busting out a Bible and looking for ugly passages (I can find pleeeeeeeeeeenty if you want).

Edit: As for examples of violence to spread Christianity in the Western World, the Christianization of Europe occurred in the ancient world / middle ages. So outside of Europe, you'd be looking at the extermination of Indians in the Americas and in Africa you'd be looking at missionaries during the colonial period (particularly from 1880-1940). Christian religious violence occurs all the time in the Western World, against Jews in different parts of Europe, now Muslims in Australia (that one has both a religious and racial element to it), abortion clinic bombings in the US... I mean, come on. It happens all the time.