lukethethird
unknown member
Anyone still in denial?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
BTW, The Beatles were more popular than Jesus, and still are
- Thread starter lukethethird
- Start date
Altfish
Veteran Member
Not me
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
True; even the Christians have forgotten aboút Christ.
That said, The Beatles (and Elvis) were overrated and overhyped.
Lennon was bigoted, abused women, and neglected his son, yet was touted as a "peace and love" figure.
That said, The Beatles (and Elvis) were overrated and overhyped.
Lennon was bigoted, abused women, and neglected his son, yet was touted as a "peace and love" figure.
The Beatles are boring as hell. I only like the Yellow Submarine movie and soundtrack.
So you find anything more sophisticated than Yellow Submarine" boring? Philistine!
Beatles music was varied, sophisticated and frequently musically complex. Their studio albums were ground-breaking and utilized cutting edge tech. Their politics and social commentary reflected the ethos of a generation.
Stones? Elvis? Meh.
Go fanboy to someone else. I really don't care. I'll stick with David Bowie.
No, they aren't and never were.
When the Beatles were starting out they were mostly a boy band (ala NKOTB) and women were mostly the fans. When they got older and did more drugs it was mostly stoned out losers that were listening to them. Now, it's just a bunch of gen z hipsters that care about them as their original fan base is literally half-dead.
Anyway, if I make comparisons them of other genres of music at the time other than a song or two they're very basic and boring.
More recently: "Who's Paul McCartney?"
Probably because you take their pop music advances for granted.
Don't get me wrong, they did pop music.
But show me a work as cutting edge as Norwegian Wood, at the time.
Personally, I don't care all that much. It was top 40 radio music. I was more into sci-fi, until I discovered Led Zep.
Eventually I noticed the Stones and other such things.
Tom
Pretty much. At least the Stones had an edge and were rock 'n' roll from the beginning.
It reminds me of something my mom told me. She was a teen in the '60s (born in 1950). The Beatles were on the Ed Sullivan Show one day and her father called her in the room, thinking she'd like them. They were playing I Want to Hold Your Hand. She got bored and left the room. A few days later, the Stones were on and playing Let's Spend the Night Together. To her dad's chagrin, my mom ended up loving it. He made an angry face with his bottom lip sticking out, which he always did when he was mad. Lol. The Stones were always my mom's favorite band for the rest of her life. She only got into the Beatles when they started dropping acid, which is what made them interesting.
Pastor Thurmond Babbs of Cleveland, Ohio, threatened to excommunicate any member of his congregation who dared attend a Beatles’ concert, and KZEE in Weatherford, Texas, “damned their songs eternally.” The outcry reached all the way to the Pope, who denounced Lennon’s words in a statement to the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano: “Some subjects must not be dealt with profanely, even in the world of Beatniks.” The governments of South Africa (where apartheid was still enforced) and Spain (ruled by General Franco’s dictatorial regime) also issued official condemnations.
When John Lennon's 'Jesus' Controversy Turned Ugly
Off handed remark by one of the Beatles.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
With it being considered the Beatles were groundbreaking for their time, I'd much rather prefer the Stones. It took the Beatles adding drugs and going solo to get interesting, and get away from the boy band rubbish they were and into the deeper territory they were capable of. The Stones, they've always rocked, they've always rolled, and set trends as well that are still felt in rock and metal today. And they were pretty dark for their time, as well as an early example of mental health being a topic in mainstream music.
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
It was actually a discussion that had went in the direction of spirituality, and what Lennon said was meant more of it's a tragedy that the Beatles are bigger than Jesus, a faddish rock group instead of a moral teacher. It was later taken out of context and twisted--by Southern Evangelical Christians--into a statement that appeared egocentric and anti-Christian. The off handed remarks were from those such as the aforementioned pastor. It got so ugly and out of hand that the Beatles and their management team feared for their safety and lives.Pastor Thurmond Babbs of Cleveland, Ohio, threatened to excommunicate any member of his congregation who dared attend a Beatles’ concert, and KZEE in Weatherford, Texas, “damned their songs eternally.” The outcry reached all the way to the Pope, who denounced Lennon’s words in a statement to the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano: “Some subjects must not be dealt with profanely, even in the world of Beatniks.” The governments of South Africa (where apartheid was still enforced) and Spain (ruled by General Franco’s dictatorial regime) also issued official condemnations.
When John Lennon's 'Jesus' Controversy Turned Ugly
Off handed remark by one of the Beatles.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Jesus was a humble person, a Jewish Rabbi, selected/appointed by G-d for the reformation of Jewish people to set them on the path of Moses, a Messenger/Prophet of G-d and follower of the teachings of Moses.
Jesus had no craving for popularity. Had Jesus, please?
Jesus was not even a Christian, please.
Regards
Hardly. They were possibly the most influential and successful rock band in history.The 10 best rock bands ever
They started out as a pop band, but soon branched into other styles. By the time they became a studio band they were heavy into social, political and religious themes, and were stylistically the most varied band of their time. They were also, at the time, the most technically complex and sophisticated studio group out there.
By their Sergeant Pepper album, they were virtually using their state-of-the-art studio as an instrument. Nothing so sonically complex had ever been released before, nor would it have been technically possible just a couple years previously.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
I do have to say though, the more I've learned about the Beatles and the members, the more I've grown to see the Beatles as something that got them launched but at the same time something that was an anchor, holding them down and caging them into such ugly and trendy poppy garbage. On their own though, Paul and John especially shined in ways they couldn't in the Beatles. Because the Beatles is a tiny wading pool and they needed an ocean.
And, BTW, does anyone know what the hell is up with Yoko in the Instant Karma video? Saying she looks out place doesn't even begin to describe her, what seems to me, inexplicable appearance and behavior in the video.
And, BTW, does anyone know what the hell is up with Yoko in the Instant Karma video? Saying she looks out place doesn't even begin to describe her, what seems to me, inexplicable appearance and behavior in the video.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
IMO, they didn't really get to that until after the Beatles. Really, they set trends followed by Madonna, Micheal, New Kids, Backstreet Boys, and other heavily processed, highly formulated pop acts where success is massive but talent is rare (such as a sea of people wiggling and thrashing about whereas Micheal Jackson could dance).
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Eric Clapton should be bigger than the Beatles, and thus bigger than Jesus.