Comments on: They Sold Their Souls for Rock-n-Roll & Rock-n-Roll Sorcerers of the New Age Revolution http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/ Christian Philosophy, Apologetics, and Theology Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:21:29 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Doug Beaumont http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/#comment-733 Doug Beaumont Sun, 06 Sep 2009 01:11:27 +0000 http://souldevice.wordpress.com/?p=205#comment-733 David, your post reveals some major confusion. I assume you have never seen the video or else maybe my post would be more understandable to you. For example when you said , "Disregarding points simply because of “juxtaposing imagery” is foolishness" you seem not to realize that it is Schimmel's imagery and not the musician's I was referring to. Further, his point was most certainly not that only God can use music for good. And I can't even begin to follow your thinking on the backwards message issue. David, your post reveals some major confusion. I assume you have never seen the video or else maybe my post would be more understandable to you. For example when you said , “Disregarding points simply because of “juxtaposing imagery” is foolishness” you seem not to realize that it is Schimmel’s imagery and not the musician’s I was referring to. Further, his point was most certainly not that only God can use music for good. And I can’t even begin to follow your thinking on the backwards message issue.

]]> By: David Xaviel http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/#comment-732 David Xaviel Sun, 06 Sep 2009 00:27:53 +0000 http://souldevice.wordpress.com/?p=205#comment-732 You dedicated way too much time to your rhetoric as to why you think Joe Schimmel was wrong in his interpretations, but once you revealed why you thought so, it became apparent that your reasons were unconvincing. Such as, saying that "I am he" is not the same as "Eh ma I" because the sound is different. The point of saying words backwards is to re-program your brain. Disregarding points simply because of "juxtaposing imagery" is foolishness. You must realize that the entertainment industry, and specifically music, is built on imagery. Thus, you must "juxtapose" the images that musicians intentionally use, in order to illustrate the effect that it has on a person, subconsciously. The images used by musicians is not accidental, it is intentional. Also, Joe Schimmel stated that music can be used for good -- by God, not by you. To generalize Schimmel's statements and say that music can be good or bad is to suggest that music still is what you make of it, when the whole purpose of the documentary was to illustrate that popular music in the 20th century is not what you make of it -- the organic feelings created by that music is only an illusion of evil to dupe you into thinking that you're a God. You dedicated way too much time to your rhetoric as to why you think Joe Schimmel was wrong in his interpretations, but once you revealed why you thought so, it became apparent that your reasons were unconvincing.

Such as, saying that “I am he” is not the same as “Eh ma I” because the sound is different. The point of saying words backwards is to re-program your brain.

Disregarding points simply because of “juxtaposing imagery” is foolishness. You must realize that the entertainment industry, and specifically music, is built on imagery. Thus, you must “juxtapose” the images that musicians intentionally use, in order to illustrate the effect that it has on a person, subconsciously.

The images used by musicians is not accidental, it is intentional.

Also, Joe Schimmel stated that music can be used for good — by God, not by you. To generalize Schimmel’s statements and say that music can be good or bad is to suggest that music still is what you make of it, when the whole purpose of the documentary was to illustrate that popular music in the 20th century is not what you make of it — the organic feelings created by that music is only an illusion of evil to dupe you into thinking that you’re a God.

]]> By: Recording Engineer http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/#comment-682 Recording Engineer Tue, 26 May 2009 14:04:40 +0000 http://souldevice.wordpress.com/?p=205#comment-682 Speech reversals are very uncommon. I have been a recording engineer for 20 plus years and at the time Zeps Zoso album was made we didn't have the technology required to create reverse speech. I watched a few hours of this documentary, some of it is dead on and some of it is nitpicking. However having been around rock musicians my entire professional life there's no denying that some are Satanists. There's also no denial that they use Sex in the lyrics to sell more albums to impressionable teens, but come on who isn't aware of this fact? I felt he spent too much time on this topic. However his point was valid about there being so much horrific stuff being produced that parents are desensitized to the milder sexual stuff. I didn't like his Pink Floyd reference because I think it was taken out of context. I believe Floyd's Animals album was pointing out the plight of domestic animals from a entirely unique and warped point of view. I don't think blasphemy was intended. Your review is as biased as the documentary, maybe more so. Speech reversals are very uncommon. I have been a recording engineer for 20 plus years and at the time Zeps Zoso album was made we didn’t have the technology required to create reverse speech. I watched a few hours of this documentary, some of it is dead on and some of it is nitpicking. However having been around rock musicians my entire professional life there’s no denying that some are Satanists. There’s also no denial that they use Sex in the lyrics to sell more albums to impressionable teens, but come on who isn’t aware of this fact? I felt he spent too much time on this topic. However his point was valid about there being so much horrific stuff being produced that parents are desensitized to the milder sexual stuff.

I didn’t like his Pink Floyd reference because I think it was taken out of context. I believe Floyd’s Animals album was pointing out the plight of domestic animals from a entirely unique and warped point of view. I don’t think blasphemy was intended.

Your review is as biased as the documentary, maybe more so.

]]> By: Doug Beaumont http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/#comment-564 Doug Beaumont Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:45:17 +0000 http://souldevice.wordpress.com/?p=205#comment-564 What, were you wearing the yellow shades again??? What did I tell you about that? What, were you wearing the yellow shades again??? What did I tell you about that?

]]> By: spicher http://souldevice.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/they-sold-their-souls-for-rock-n-roll-rock-n-roll-sorcerers-of-the-new-age-revolution/#comment-563 spicher Mon, 05 Jan 2009 04:09:18 +0000 http://souldevice.wordpress.com/?p=205#comment-563 well, I just finished reading your blog backwards, while squinting. I have strange urges to worship the devil. Thanks a lot. well, I just finished reading your blog backwards, while squinting. I have strange urges to worship the devil. Thanks a lot.

]]>