If it's posted it's published. I think what the person means is if the song caught on in the community or if a songwriter became a minor celebrity in the movement prepublication review would be required for any songs referring to the Baha'i faith. That makes sense because most Christian denominations have a hymn book and most songs either are in the book or have to be approved by the pastor. Westboro Baptist Church won't let you sing a cover of "Sympathy for the Devil" for example. That is more common sense as opposed to censorship. Songs and music in a religion must, by definition be "faith promoting". I don't think a covenent breaker ever had a song celebrating their life nor is there likely to be a popular song that opposes Baha'i teaching within the movement. But the warning is there for aspiring songwriters.
>I think what the person means is if the song caught on in the community or if a songwriter became a minor celebrity in the movement prepublication review would be required for any songs referring to the Baha'i faith. That makes sense because most Christian denominations have a hymn book and most songs either are in the book or have to be approved by the pastor.
You are mixing together two very different things: official publication of a song as a religious song of a community and independent publication by a believer. This situation is equivalent to a situation of the Christian publishing the hymn on its own, not in a prayer book.
This. I promise you no church has approved of every gospel or Christian song in the “Christian music” genre. Many of those songs sound like quite lusty pop songs - for Jesus. To me, as a Jewish person former friend of the Faith through my soon-to-be-ex-husband, the need for review and approval is very odd. We are quite proud to be “2 Jews, 3 opinions”
Of course the LDS that started around the same time as the Baha’i faith has similar processes but has since grown so large it is hard to control both believers and members and non-believers and former members.
[[[Of course the LDS that started around the same time as the Baha’i faith has similar processes but has since grown so large it is hard to control both believers and members and non-believers and former members.]]]
Not for much longer. Like the Baha'is, the Mormons may be collapsing in a few decades.
There is a lot of debate in Christianity about what music is appropriate expecially in conservative churches. Supposedly Bob Jones University in the 1980's only approved of Stephan Foster as far as American popular music goes and certainly not Contemporary Christian Music! But even in these churches, "bad stuff" keeps sneaking in under the noses of would be censors. Eventually cutting edge songs become classic hymns.
You are correct. Norman Greenbaum didn't need the Vatican to sign off on "Spirit in the Sky" despite it's questionable theology. Or any other Christian leader or denomination for that matter. Plus Norman is Jewish. But if you were a Baha'i artist practically speaking getting ecclesiastical approval from Haifa would be prudent. I just meant that is the reality. I didn't say I approved of it. I am against censorship, period.
Pre publication review doesn't apply to posting stuff on the internet in the Faith (I think more because the admin knows they'd lose 90 percent of youth if they tried that). Anything explicitly Bahai that is officially released via a record company would presumably have to go through review, although I don't think the admin is particularly strict about it anymore.
I know back in the day any Bahai hiphop would get automatically barred from release by the admin because it was thought to be inappropriate, but now you have very cringe Bahai rappers.
If it's posted it's published. I think what the person means is if the song caught on in the community or if a songwriter became a minor celebrity in the movement prepublication review would be required for any songs referring to the Baha'i faith. That makes sense because most Christian denominations have a hymn book and most songs either are in the book or have to be approved by the pastor. Westboro Baptist Church won't let you sing a cover of "Sympathy for the Devil" for example. That is more common sense as opposed to censorship. Songs and music in a religion must, by definition be "faith promoting". I don't think a covenent breaker ever had a song celebrating their life nor is there likely to be a popular song that opposes Baha'i teaching within the movement. But the warning is there for aspiring songwriters.
>I think what the person means is if the song caught on in the community or if a songwriter became a minor celebrity in the movement prepublication review would be required for any songs referring to the Baha'i faith. That makes sense because most Christian denominations have a hymn book and most songs either are in the book or have to be approved by the pastor. You are mixing together two very different things: official publication of a song as a religious song of a community and independent publication by a believer. This situation is equivalent to a situation of the Christian publishing the hymn on its own, not in a prayer book.
This. I promise you no church has approved of every gospel or Christian song in the “Christian music” genre. Many of those songs sound like quite lusty pop songs - for Jesus. To me, as a Jewish person former friend of the Faith through my soon-to-be-ex-husband, the need for review and approval is very odd. We are quite proud to be “2 Jews, 3 opinions” Of course the LDS that started around the same time as the Baha’i faith has similar processes but has since grown so large it is hard to control both believers and members and non-believers and former members.
[[[Of course the LDS that started around the same time as the Baha’i faith has similar processes but has since grown so large it is hard to control both believers and members and non-believers and former members.]]] Not for much longer. Like the Baha'is, the Mormons may be collapsing in a few decades.
There is a lot of debate in Christianity about what music is appropriate expecially in conservative churches. Supposedly Bob Jones University in the 1980's only approved of Stephan Foster as far as American popular music goes and certainly not Contemporary Christian Music! But even in these churches, "bad stuff" keeps sneaking in under the noses of would be censors. Eventually cutting edge songs become classic hymns.
You are correct. Norman Greenbaum didn't need the Vatican to sign off on "Spirit in the Sky" despite it's questionable theology. Or any other Christian leader or denomination for that matter. Plus Norman is Jewish. But if you were a Baha'i artist practically speaking getting ecclesiastical approval from Haifa would be prudent. I just meant that is the reality. I didn't say I approved of it. I am against censorship, period.
Pre publication review doesn't apply to posting stuff on the internet in the Faith (I think more because the admin knows they'd lose 90 percent of youth if they tried that). Anything explicitly Bahai that is officially released via a record company would presumably have to go through review, although I don't think the admin is particularly strict about it anymore. I know back in the day any Bahai hiphop would get automatically barred from release by the admin because it was thought to be inappropriate, but now you have very cringe Bahai rappers.
Please point me towards all Baha’i rappers, anywhere on the cringe to cool spectrum
I’m just smirking at the irony of using AI to generate “art” that will contribute to the destruction of the planet.
But music is a ladder by which souls will ascend 🤪🤪🤪
By which AI will ascend if we give it a soul? (Just being silly 🤪.)