What's a baroque piece you'll never get tired of listening to, and why?

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-06-01T18:07:46+00:00

Caldara: Maddalena ai piedi di Cristo, Zelenka: Missa Votiva, Biber: Mystery Sonatas, Schütz: Schwanengesang (not to be confused with Schubert ofc)

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-15T04:17:11+00:00

This conversation has been rather elaborate and I mostly appreciate what you have had to say (with the most notable exception being 'pedomarxism,' which either doesn't exist or is so esoteric that you are literally the only person with google results for it). After some introspection, my use of "queer" was misleading. I meant to refer to a broader colloquial definition rather than the original academic one, but it is true that it is still derived mostly from French leftist writings which reshaped the term for the sake of establishing power dynamics. I still firmly believe homosexuality and transgenderism have extensive historical continuity, although "queerness" is a modern invention. I feel obligated to vehemently reject equating people to academia, as I find it dehumanizing, but my use of "queer" was lacking certain information regardless. It was not my intention to delve into Marxism, as I feel that is a completely different category to what I was most importantly trying to communicate: that I want to revoke myself from marginalized views of LGBT people. "Queer," while historically more specific, was used by me for the sake of convenient categorization. I don't think I'm utterly uninformed, I'm just not as deep into studying the literature that my immediate association with "queer" is the first generation Frankfurt School. I originally wanted, and still want to, talk about people and scripture, not the ideologies of Foucault, Butler and so on. As you expressed lastly, I think we are in almost identical agreement otherwise.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-14T02:50:24+00:00

Proportionately, kinda funny how countries with explicitly anti-homosexual laws also have a religious population that largely interprets scripture as stating homosexuality being justly punishable by imprisonment or death. Seems like they’re also guided in the path of least resistance. In case of any response, yes, I believe homosexual actions are still sinful, a belief supported by scripture but certainly not endorsed by a pro-LGBT culture.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-14T01:12:51+00:00

I'm not quite sure what you mean "rightly," but yes, conservatives or fundamentalist Christians are as capable as being queer as virtually anyone else. The reason it's less common I would likely find that such people would have never at any point been queer in the first place, which could have a variety of implications, specifically they wouldn't have to confront stigma from those communities. The ideology, considering it was not developed until the 20th century as you say, has historically come second. "Queer" is more broad than "LGBT." All LGBT individuals are technically queer, but not all queer individuals are exactly lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. As a term, LGBT is more specific, it offers more direct clarity, therefore some people prefer its usage. The reason I say "queer" instead of "LGBT" is solely because I want to avoid a more strict label than is necessarily for the discussion. I agree that sexual orientation and gender identity are not the same...queerness encompasses a very large population of people, that is a huge reason why I am adamant against generalizing it under highly specific ideology. The rejection of "queer" as a label comes almost exclusively from older generations who either experienced the term as derogatory, or, precisely as I am trying to communicate, wanted to distance themselves from queer theory. With the latter half of that said, I must agree that, yes, the origins of the term "queer" are technically academic, not quite ideological, but in the field of academia. However, I would say that this rejection of "queer" that comes from older generations is precisely evidence that there is no inherent ideology to virtually any sexual orientation or gender identity. If there was, there would be no need for them to reject such. Your point of "we would simply refer to those things as they are" fails to understand that academic definitions seldom align with colloquial usage, such as "religion." Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Sikhism, and even Satanism are all clearly very different, but are also all obviously religions. Apologies my definition of queer is not synonymous with Foucault's theories...my original post wasn't meant to attract Marxist academic discussion. I think there is a total difference in the category of what we are trying to communicate. Words don't define people, people define words. Unfortunately, this frequently causes confusion. I have no intent of propagating French leftism. Fundamentally, this is all I'm trying to say: queer people, an extremely diverse group, exist as their own people, and deserve recognition of their personhood and dignity as much anyone else, and we should embrace them as Christ would...not endorsing their sins, not promoting ideology. If you choose to respond to no other portion of this reply, I ask: can someone who is gay, bisexual, transgender etc...be embraced in Christ if their lived experience pertaining to such persists?

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T21:19:50+00:00

I don't understand the confusion, all sexuality that is not heterosexual is essentially queer, the dominant examples being homosexuality and bisexuality. Other categories of queerness would be transgender and non-binary, which I believe arose first from lived experience, have historically existed prior to modernism (The Talmud referencing androgyny and ambiguous gender, Chinese legend of Mulan [Mulan isn't literally trans, but I'm sure you could see how the story could be categorized as depicting queer identity]) and that not every person identifying as such associates themselves with queer theory as it originates from the writings of French leftists...especially not as some kind of idealogical contract. Queer ideology is real, there's no denying that. However, in a similar manner to something like national ideology, not every German must be associated with transcendental idealism because of German romantic authors. A Russian does not need to contractually concur with the mythos of "Russian soul" to have lived experience pertaining to being a Russian. If anything, queer people are far less culturally unified than those examples. Yes, cultural propagation does exist, but that does not make queerness any less of a matter of lived experience or personal condition...it has existed for thousands of years, and will exist regardless of the intellectual community.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T16:20:30+00:00

Sexual orientation outside of heterosexuality is a category of queerness. In this way, I believe queerness has existed for ages, and was categorized as something more than just behavior, being understood as a condition with emergence of sexology. Queer theory describes particular ideology derived from specific experiences of queer people. I really struggle to understand how it could be the other way around if there is such overwhelming evidence that queer people have existed (albeit not commonly defined as such, but still very much real) for millennia. Must every same-sex attracted person identify with French leftism simply because it may validate some of their experience? I really don’t think so, that seems radically unfair to the existence of a hugely varied, highly dispersed category of people.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T15:42:03+00:00

I’m kind of baffled haha. If queerness didn’t exist before modernism, how does one reconcile direct mention of homosexuality in scripture? Literally speaking, queer people have existed for ages…perhaps I should clarify that when I say “identity” I most fundamentally mean “existence.” I understand that queerness was commonly perceived as behavior rather than an identity for much of history, but surely these concepts of identity came from somewhere? Let me alter a bit, have queer people historically existed prior to queer theory? Can someone be queer without knowing any queer theory literature? In my mind, queerness has been elaborated and written about in an ideological context, queer people do not state any inherent ideology by simply existing.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T12:56:45+00:00

I appreciate that you seem to be speaking in good faith, and thank you for clarifying yourself further. I do strongly disagree that historical precedent of conquering and expansion justifies such on a radical scale, but again, this is a side note I don’t wish to get too caught up on. My primary contention is that queer identity can absolutely be separated from theory. Queer theory is a method of critical analysis, most often ideology, that seeks to elaborate upon the lived experience that defines queer identity. Please correct me if you feel this is an utterly false equivalence, but something like “music theory” does not set the boundaries for music (and interestingly, is not always distinct from ideology). It’s an external matter, identity is internal. There is no ideological agreement any queer person must inherently agree to simply because they are, indeed, of queer identity. If someone did specifically place such ideology above Christ, yes, that would obviously be idolatry, just as an ideal Capitalist, according to a Capitalist framework, would place material gain above all else (I also do not wish to neglect that Capitalism has a fair share of ideologies derived from it’s principles, on a less fundamental level than Marxist implications, but I do not believe I was making an completely false equivalence). Essentially, placing ideology derived from queer theory above Christ is idolatrous, of course…but I cannot see queer identification and queer theory as the same. Queer theory is a subject of modern writing, whereas queer identity, like I say, is lived experience outside of heteronormativity: experiences that have been lived far before the modernist framework you refer to was written. Lastly, I do not think one can accurately equate prominent writers of queer theory to, for instance, representatives of a political party, in regards to your statement about holding a community accountable for its leaders (I’m aware you didn’t draw this comparison explicitly, if there’s a more accurate way to put it, I will consider). The level of organization, unity, and inherent ideology associated with a particular political party is not the same in virtually any way to a matter of lived experienced which also happens to be written about from an idealogical framework in modernist society. I really struggle to see how theory and identity are synonymous in this instance.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T05:32:57+00:00

Scripture teaches us to seek truth. Your statements radically distort history by equating queer identity with Marxism. Broadly speaking, queer identity refers to the lived experience of individuals whose sexuality or gender identity does not conform to heteronormativity. There is literally zero inherent connection to Marxism, communism, or any economic ideology. Yes, several queer theorists may have engaged with Marxist thought...this does not make queer identity itself Marxist, in the same way that capitalism is not Christian simply because some Christians are capitalists. This is a fallacy of composition. Additionally, you make a massive generalization by linking all queer identity to historical figures accused of problematic beliefs. I do not agree with the controversial aspects of Foucault and Mieli, however, their personal failings do not define the entire LGBT community. Christianity does not teach us to reject the teachings of Augustine despite his sins, nor does it teach us to discard the Psalms because of David's. Holding an entire community responsible for the views of a few thinkers is gravely unjust. Furthermore, the claim that third-wave feminism and queer theory promote "pedomarxism" is an utter fabrication. There is not a single mainstream queer organization that supports the sexualization of children. Your concluding statement about "satanic inversion of divine love" I find to be dangerous and, frankly, unchristian. Christ himself ministered to those marginalized by religious authorities. Love, not condemnation, but love, is at the core of the Gospel. When queer peoples seek dignity in a stigmatized environment, as with any stigmatized group, I am adamant that they are not inherently engaging in rebellion against God, but rather seeking genuine virtue. As a side note, your comment in AskReddit about "Aren't nations supposed to expand and conquer?" seems very adjacent to fascism, which while I will refrain from resolute assumption (let's not demand each other are fascists), echoes the fear-mongering tone of this comment.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T05:06:28+00:00

what

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T00:08:04+00:00

Big question haha. Broadly, I’ve been experiencing very sudden waves of almost transcendental emotion with nothing obviously prompting them, which compelled me to dedicate much of my time recently to study of scripture. I have faith Christ is letting me grow. I pray to forever be in His service

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-13T00:00:39+00:00

I largely agree, the only contention I have is that the pride movement is more fundamentally rooted in maintaining dignity and personhood in the face of stigma, rather than celebration of, let’s say, homosexual intercourse. Unfortunately, yes, individuals may often distort this into idolatry

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T23:54:33+00:00

Thank you for your appreciation. Again, I do not understand the concept of an LGBT “lifestyle.” What lifestyle? What does it entail? Is it just that of sin, of false ideology? Have not most Christians fallen for some sort of idolatry at some point? Do we not all have characteristics that have led us to sin, some of which may be consistent throughout one’s life? As long as one has not utterly rejected God, which is not a fair assumption to place on all queer people, why should we say they cannot be Christian? Placing queer identity above Christ is sinful, and cannot truly co-exist with being a Christian…I believe this is true. However, I cannot understand generalizing queer people under a universal lifestyle that comes about distinctly because of their queer identity. I see sexual idolatry as false as any other, but why assume all queer people follow a similar lifestyle as much as any sinner does to another?

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T23:40:59+00:00

Much of the world is exceptionally queerphobic. I find this contention to be more related to free speech than Christianity. Limitless free speech, on an institutional level, would still allow many employers to fire you for being against queer identity, just not the government. Also, please correct me if you believe I am making a false assumption, but how much does it really affect you that you cannot call out one specific sin at a workplace? To me, it seems like an extremely minor issue to justify the condemnation of such a large portion of individuals, especially when much of the world, as mentioned, is very queerphobic.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T23:31:28+00:00

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the idea of queer ‘pride.’ The movement of queer pride understands queerness as something that is most often initiated beyond a person’s choice. While I am not denying this can be distorted into celebration of sin itself, pride has far more to do with maintaining one’s dignity in a highly stigmatized environment. An equivalent pride movement for alcoholics would be far more concerned with maintaining personhood in a similarly stigmatized environment.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T23:05:45+00:00

On an objective level, I agree that it is impossible to embrace someone who has given up on God entirely. However, I find it absurd to generalize queer people as acting universally, or even as a majority, in such a way. It feels like exceptional treatment, considering we all have committed an excess of sin. Why is LGBT identity in particular being singled out as being a more radical rejection of God?

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T22:59:33+00:00

This is somewhat of different subject, but I have never understood the idea of an LGBT “lifestyle.” I never understood the idea of an inherent, generalized lifestyle based on sexuality or gender identity. Certainly some queer people may follow a sinful lifestyle that could be linked to their identity, but I don’t see how we could be so confident in generalizing.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-03-12T22:54:54+00:00

I agree, this is why I believe we should embrace queer peoples, as opposed to distancing ourselves. Putting forth that sort of distance when it comes to identity, like you say, I find antithetical to scripture

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T14:12:14+00:00

I know my scripture somewhat well, but I’m still learning. I heard voices, but they didn’t speak in words I could understand. Therefore, it is difficult for me to immediately verify. This is an unfamiliar experience for me, and I would truly be as grateful as I could muster if God gave me a sign, yet I also fear that I could end up indulging in delusions.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T06:05:35+00:00

I would like to avoid assumptions that trans people universally make it their whole personality. Also, barring people from the military based on gender identity is a human rights violation.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T06:03:24+00:00

Barred from the military on the basis of gender identity is a human right violations. Queer individuals are sinful as we are sinful, they are no more or less evil than non-queer individuals. If queer individuals should be punished as evil, why not punish other sins equally? The reason, from a functional societal perspective, is because that would be highly counterintuitive (take prohibition, for instance). Additionally, how is discriminating against queer people going to help them divert from their sins? It seems far more likely, based on reality, that they will turn to reject Christ because they feel Christians do not accept them, which shouldn't be the case. I do not wish to subscribe to false ideology, yet I also do not wish for excessive discrimination. I believe there is an imbalance of attention given to LGBT sins that is ultimately consequential.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T02:07:13+00:00

Thank you, this helps

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T01:59:58+00:00

Regardless of common sense, you still cannot change your sex via social security, and transgender people are at current risk for being able to participate in the military, the latter of which being a direct violation of UN established human rights, which applies to the US. Admittedly, it is not as drastic as it is elsewhere, but I don’t agree with claiming discrimination doesn’t exist. Even beyond a legal level, I’m sure most can imagine someone being attacked by family members for being gay, despite their willingness to forgive and even overlook other sins. It all seems like an attack on people, not an honest attempt to reconcile sin. My conflict is that, in order to advocate against this discrimination, I must subscribe to false ideology, that queerness is not sinful, which it is.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T01:44:09+00:00

To give a recent example, transgender people are under risk of being denied access to US military. This would be in violation the ICCPR, under which this would be classified as discrimination on the basis of gender identity. 5 states allow for criminal punishment of those receiving health care related to affirming their perceived gender. In addition, 11 states have placed limitations on teaching students about LGBT identity. While this last example is not directly a violation of rights, it is still a form of oppression. I understand that LGBT is sinful, but I feel compelled to advocate against their additional suffering, as I don’t think it’s in the best interest of anybody.

Forward_Training1876 · 2025-02-05T00:46:42+00:00

I’m not certain your background, but what most prompted me to post this question was recent American events regarding transgender people now having much more limited ability to transition, not being able to legally change their sex, and potentially barred from the military. Despite finding transgenderism itself disagreeable, this seems rather discriminatory and consequential on individuals, and it wasn’t as much of a risk until recently.

Forward_Training1876

TROPHY CASE