Page 6 of 6 (105 items) « First ... < Previous 2 3 4 5 6
This post has 104 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 19 2009 10:27 PM

John McComb:

Ah, so that's a great big "No" vote for Glenn Gould, is it?

Didn't you say earlier that you liked Bach in any form except played on a saxophone? I gotta tell you, hearing you now say that pianos are also a no-no is a bit surprising. It kind of makes me wonder if we've really seen the end of the "exceptions" list. For instance, is it o.k. for Yo Yo Mah to play a Bach organ piece on his cello?

How many forms are included in "any form"? Are jug bands still o.k.? How about kazoos?

You are a funny guy George.

I used to be OK with Bach on the piano (while preferring the harpsichord), but they've begun playing Bach as though they were playing Beethoven or Rachmaninoff -- with dynamics and trying to be "expressive", but that isn't Bach.  Actually, Glenn Gould is probably better than some of the current offerings such as Murray Parahia.  Jug bands and kazoos would fall into the category of just fun.  They aren't really performances.  That's OK.  It's also OK to practice Bach on the piano -- just keep it at practice.  Another thing that has contributed to my dislike of Bach on the piano is that radio announcers have taken to referring to them as "keyboard concertos"; apparently they're trying to conceal the fact that it isn't being played on the proper instrument.   Usually they will say something such as "XXX by Bach transcribed for guitar."  Where's Wanda Landowska when you need her?

BTW:  Say the secret word and win $100.00 [That's Groucho so it's supposed to be funny.  Want me to wiggle my cigar too?  I don't have one.].

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 19 2009 10:28 PM

Ted Hans:

Alain Maashe:

the Exegetical Summary series as its name indicates merely summarizes exegetical conclusions from various commentaries and grammars

if you have a problem, it is not will SIL, it is with Morris' TNTC, Mounce's NICNT, Ladd's Revelation, Thomas' WEC, and Walwoord's commentary

 

Great to hear from you i was just wondering i have not seen Alain's post lately & i get this. I trust you are well, do take care.

Every Blessings

Ted 

 

Ted,

I am doing fine

I am keeping an eye (just one) on the forums

I am just very busy these days with school projects

I try to stay away from long discussions because it is hard for me to pull away once I get started

but sometimes I cannot resist the urge to keep George honest Big Smile (it is for his own good since he is writing a commentary on Revelation) Stick out tongue

Have a great week

Alain

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 19 2009 10:51 PM

Matthew C Jones:

That's funny George. ......I only have one leg. ....For real. Big Smile

Anyhow, What I am saying is you are interested (curious a better word?) in reading it, discoveing what the others read, and said, and how it may have formed their lives. I believe interlinears do have something in them to be pondered. I am also interested in the lives of Wescott & Hort but NOT because I think they were Godly men. I'm just curious. Besides, my life expectancy is not long enough to master everything I woulld like to study.Time

Sorry to have gone in a bad direction.

I think W & H were godly men.  At least as godly as many of those in pulpits today -- especially the televangelists.  I can't see what you would find in an interlinear to be pondered; it has a Greek/Hebrew text and it has an English text.  The only reason I can see for owning one is to compare the English to the Greek/Hebrew.  That is better done by looking up the word in BDAG, HALOT or BDB and going through the meanings seeing how the word is used in differing contexts.  If you're going to use an interlinear, you might as well just read the English text.

My life expectancy isn't long enough to master everything I want to study either.  Looking at the history of my family I expect I will live until my mid 80's or somewhat better.  I'm already 38.  Wink  That doesn't give me much time.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 19 2009 10:53 PM

Alain Maashe:

I try to stay away from long discussions because it is hard for me to pull away once I get started

 

but sometimes I cannot resist the urge to keep George honest Big Smile (it is for his own good since he is writing a commentary on Revelation) Stick out tongue

If he were telling the truth he would tell you that he is trying to drag me off into the Never-Never Land of Fundamentalism. Devil

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2855
Forum MVP
Ted Hans | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 20 2009 1:32 AM

Ted Hans:
Dr Masters of the Met Tab (Spurgeon church in London) is sympathetic to the view mentioned by our dear friend although ( the Met Tab) they have a piano.

What a blunder! The Metropolitan Tabernacle(Spurgeon's church in London) does have an ORGAN & not a Piano. I was wrong in saying piano before i get a lot of protestation from my good friends in the UK. It is an ORGAN, sorry for the confusion and wrong info. Ted

 

 

Ted Hans:

George Somsel:

Ted Hans:
 I suspect he is of a Reformed persuasion or coming at it from a particular Reformed perspective.

That is not Reformed.  I should know.

 

George what do you mean? what about the regulative principle? Spurgeon would not allow instrument for the reason given by our good friend. of course not all Reform guys agree with this. Truly it is found and rooted in some aspect of the Reform tradition. Dr Masters of the Met Tab (Spurgeon church in London) is sympathetic to the view mentioned by our dear friend although ( the Met Tab) they have a piano. I know of Reform Church's in the UK who take the same view basing it on the Regulative Principle & i suspect that is the case in the US. How do i know this b/cos John Frame was criticise by Reform theologians for his view on Worship. If by "this is not Reform" you mean not all agree on this then i would say - yes but i was careful to note that it was an aspect from a particular Reform point of view.

I will not argue on weather you are right that this is not the consensus in the Reformed camp today but i think the traditionalist would argue that "no instrument" was the prevailing view until recently. The Puritans allowing instruments in worship? Somehow i don't see that as being possible .You may be right but i cannot say for certain.

Yours in Christ

Sir T.

 

Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ

Page 6 of 6 (105 items) « First ... < Previous 2 3 4 5 6 | RSS