All this debate about God, and no-one comes up with a definition of God. Have you ever asked yourself where your consciousness comes from? No-one knows; brain scientists are at a loss. I propose that any process complex enough develops a consciousness. The most complex process there is is the universe itself, with all its sub-processes. I therefore believe it has a consciousness, and this consciousness I call "God". Mark that this is a totally different God than that of the Christian religion.
The conductor's expression really is, exhilarating. He's completely into the music, as if he were moving every element of the world with his movements.
Vielen, vielen dank, Bach, Koopman, Amsterdam Barock Orchester, und Bacholoji für das Komponieren, Vorführen, und Hochladen dieser wunderbaren Passion!
about expressing gratitude to whomever uploaded this -- Sir/Madam, there was a distinct possibility I would have never heard this if it wasn't for your generosity and willingness to take one's time to do it. I am certain to speak on behalf of hundreds of others: you have made our lives richer. Thx. Danke. Merci. Gracias.
este oratorio es particularmente hermoso, bach es un maestro de la composicion y lo elogio.Creo que este oratorio es de los mas bonitos que hay aunque es el unico que he escuchado pero me encanto
And, how can I believe in Jesus when I have not seen the evidence for him. It's impossible! I can try as hard as I like and I still wouldn't be able to actually believe in him, I'm too rational.
To respond the correct way to this how can i believe im trying really hard thing one would have to say that you cannot believe on your own. It is the work of the Holy Spirit who creates faith in the hearts of the faithful. This comes from interaction with the word and sacrament. You cannot believe on your own. There are many sins to repent, such as disbelief. Why do you need evidence to believe in someone? Do you believe i exist? You have not seen me.
Why would I believe in someone unless there was evidence. Do you believe in Brahma? No, you don't - that's because if you did, your Biblical God would torture you for eternity. There's no proof that makes God more likely than Brahma (or the Flying Spaghetti Monster), neither is there proof that makes Brahma more likely than God!
"There are many sins to repent, such as disbelief."
Is that a sin that I commit by not having been presented any evidence for God? I could've tried believing in God right now, it wouldn't work as I need evidence in order to truly believe in anything. If I'm going to be sent to hell for not beliving something there is no evidience for, that proves God is evil (if he existed - which he doesn't).
You are stuck in the modern mindset in an ever increasing post modern world. This is what the church has to look forward to. Science and Reason have created the greatest evils known to man. People are fleeing in greater numbers from scientific reason to other things that are outside of themselves.
Science has created weapons of war that do horrible evil. Atom Bombs, Agent Orange, Napalm, Biological Weapons and so on. But even in our most well intended scientific discoveries we can have bad outcomes. Such as the spermicide nonoxynol-9 is meant to prevent unintended pregnancy but it really facilitates the spread of aids. Science has done a lot of good ill admit, but it has also caused much evil. The general feeling among people is shifting, you can see this tv shows about paranormal.
Science causes evil in the same way that gravity causes suicide by jumping off bridges. Without science, we'd be nude, dead and starving. You can't blame evil on science, blame it on misusing science. I don't think we can enjoy the benefits of science without the risk of someone misusing it. ;)
Perhaps the same is true of blaming religion of all the evils in the world? The real question is why do people misuse science? Perhaps because they are guided by their own selfish ambitions, and in some cases, Reason. For example reason would dictate that the use of the atom bomb to end WW2 was a logical use of a weapon of war. The truth of the matter is that it was and still continues to be wrong. We havent used the majority of our WMD's but we still keep them. good discussion...:-)
Well, it's neutral; I think there's a DISCOURSE of science that can be harmful - the idea that the "scientific method" (you can only believe what you can empirically prove, and that you MUST believe everything empirical) should be applied to all aspects of life was one of the main things that enabled communism and fascism in the last century. However, science as KNOWLEDGE (not as a discourse) is generally quite beneficial. The latter has always existed without the former.
The Bible was inspired by God, however i will assume you dont believe in that ;). Do you believe that a man named Jesus Christ could have actually existed? There are also many accounts in extra biblical documents that parallel what we find in the Scriptures. There are also many examples from scripture that fortell the coming events. Daniel is a prime example, or Isaiah's prophecy about the fall of Babylon. Faith v Reason 101. Neither side will convince the other.
I think there's a great likelyhood of a man named Jesus existed, altough I don't believe he was born out of a virgin or invented a method to transmutate water into wine.
Mind telling me more about those prophecies? I'd be grateful.
certainly. Isaiah 45 is where the prophecy of Cyrus the Great is located. As you may well know the return of the jews out of Babylon after the Exile occured in 538-536 BC. Isaiah was writing during the Kings Uzziah through Hezekiah of Judah, which is approximately 767-699 BC. The prophecy of the Statue in Daniel is interesting as well in which he tells of a statue with 4 parts. Gold, Silver, Bronze and Iron, relating to the 4 great empires, Babylon, MedoPersia, Greece and Rome. Check it out.
The soloists and chorus did a fantastic job; the diction may not be perfect, but I can hear and follow most of the eight choral parts!
As for the religious debate, what difference does it make whether God exists if people cannot agree on what "believing in God" means (both in an intellectual sense and through one's actions & lifestyle)? If only I could find the time to read the works of Wittgenstein...
I just can't get why atheists have to convince everyone. If they don't believe in a God, Why do they care in the first place?
"Thank God, I don't believe in God"
Don't make such a show of your philosophy. Man has a great talent and is capable of many things, that's absolutely true. But there are some people who believe all human talent is a manifestation of some higher force. Respectable, don't you think?
Those that believe and those that refuse to believe, usually out of hate. This is why they are so concerned with pushing their non-beliefs on on others. Love one another...just as I have loved you....
If someone believes that 2+2 equals 3, wouldn't you try to convince them that 2+2 equals 4 with a very logical and basic example of counting the fingers?
In Religion, it just doesn't work that way, because religious people are afraid to count their fingers.. Because they might just end up with counting exactly 4.
Or maybe this was a terrible example because 2+2 really equals 3.. ("SHUT UP! IT DOES!")..
I'd love to here why you don't believe in God. The fact is most people who don't believe in God have a superiority complex. I myself am unsure of God's exsistance, but that unasurance came from reflective thought and self -analyis. It did not come from me thinking I was smarter than everybody else and the delusioned thought that religion is for the foolish, as it seems to be with most cases. Certainty is a disease ( that you seem to have) and you should never be certain about it.
I am not saying that religion is for the foolish, rather: theistic people shuold know better. In most cases it's through ignorance rather than research and knowledge that people believe in something completely without evidence.
If you are near or over the middle of the Agnostic scale, look up "Russel's Teapot"..
And I'm anything else than a theism/deism-prejudist..
It means that they have a very high opinion of oneself and feel threatened by anything that states that they are not the most superior thing in existance. Despite most claims there is no proof that disproves the existance or possibility of God. In fact many people argue that there is proof supporting the idea of God. Most atheists don't do ther own research they just swallow what someone else says and then claim they are the more intelligent beings. I have little respect for people like that.
I've already opened my eyes to the possibility, but I've also opened my eyes to the possibility of Allah, Brahma, The Flying Spaghetti Monster and The Invisible Pink Unicorn..
I'm defined as an agnostic tending to complete atheism by Richard Dawkins' scale og agnosticism. Again, have a short look at Russel's Teapot in Wikipedia..
You are also an atheist about most theistic deities.. You don't believe in Odin, Zeus and all those gods.. I just go one god further..
I believe there is just as good of a chance of there being allah or zues or any other god as there is the chance of there being the christian god. But about the flying spaghetti monster;most intelligent people who have commen sense and have done extensive research on it will agree that the possibility of a higher form of intelligence is much more likely than there being a material substance with no higher brain function running around. So I have to stop you there and ask you to think a bit more
That's not true. It is very probable that there is a god. You're just refusing to open your eyes. Just remember the only real wisdom is knowing you know nothing at all. And you did get that frome South Park!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
No, it's not probable that there is a god..
Rather, there is a huge propability that there is something unknown which we will work to find out..
If we don't know something, we don't fill the empty gap with imaginary things.. We figure it out through the scientific method, until it's not unknown..
Eyes all open, Venomfang X has some interesting explenations of why god exists, altough.. The Aquinas theory of the first starter.. I think it's unkown, not the god that defies laws of physics.. ;)
Please pick up a copy of "The Bible God's Word or Man's" I'm not saying it will convince you of God but it definately opens your eyes to the possibility.
If I say that there was an invisible, non-material teapot orbiting around mars.. It would have been impossible to disprove it, but the probability of it beeing there is another matter.. Atheism is defined as no belief in any form of theism. Religion is claiming something without evidence, thus the burden lies on theism to affirm the existence on something.. Rather than atheism to disprove something disprovable..
I did look at that, and again I say that the possibility of Earth being created is far more likely than a teapot floating around Mars. I disagree with your assumption that it is up to a religion to prove that there is a god. Why would it be up to them? And don't atheists believe in evolution? By your logic wouldn't it be up to them to prove it. You might say they have but the big bang theory has many holes, and discrepencies in it. Just as many as the theory of god.
Atheists commonly believe in evolution because that is the theory of which most evidence procured by the scientific method point to.. There's no evidence for god, contrary there is evidence for evolution.. They might be vague (I don't think so) but at least they're there!
Same with the big bang theory, many holes.. Because it is work in progress, not wild assumptions! ;)
Actually if you would do some research you would find that there is no actual proof supporting the theory of evolution, and all it is is one gigantic assumption. And the so called proof they found can just as easily support the exsistance of God.
So, things like genome mutations and heriditery DNA are non existant, and what we can see in microscopes are non-existant?
And the similarity in bones of earlier homo's (homo as in neandertalic descritption, 'homo sapiens') are just because they're from the same designer.. That designer is non-material, omni-potent and has a conscious? .. C'mon!..
To be quite frank: what the hell is this? Give it a rest. Bach was a devout Christian who wrote Christian music. Clearly many of the people listening to it will be Christians. Let us meditate upon Christ's passion without being confronted by your atheist gospel.
There is nothing we need to hear in what you're spewing at us. If you would deny the words of eternal life, then all of our tomorrows resolve into oblivion, and what we believed makes no difference. Theism or nihilism.
Oh, I see, the legion of militant atheists and corps of internet apologists had a large battle last month, of which you were but a small part.
Let me address both parties, then. Being a veteran of such debates: no one is impressed by hearing you repeat others' arguments a thousand times (cf. CFSM). If you can't add something new to the debate, don't.
I feel that if this were an observed rule, only the truly intelligent would have this debate. The discussions would be much smaller.
It seems your Latin is not *quite* up to par. It is a Latin restatement of "Since there was Bach, there is God" :)
I'm not about to have a scientific-method debate about a "God-hypothesis". I don't propose Him on scientific, but rather philosophical grounds. I have two nervous breakdowns to attest that, were I not a Christian, I would be mad, literally.
You are of course free to have your views, and I do apologise for my anger, but I have left the world of theism-debating for-ever.
"were I not a Christian, I would be mad, literally."
So Christian is another word for mad as it is so easily substituted?.. No, I understand what you mean... but believing in something to escape madness really has nothing to do with the something's propability of existing.. ;)
You don't need to reply to that part.. As we both know it's only going to lead to a fierce debate of God's existence..
If I state that there was a Teapot floating around mars.. It would be close to impossible to disprove it, but that doesn't make it likely.. Therefore one should rather prove it is there rather than cite "You can't disprove it, therefore it is there!"..
Evolution is also something that must be proven:
- Why do you think we have nails?
- Because god wanted to give humans a tool to better scratch themselves? No, I think not.. It's the remains of DNA-compositions that were useful as claws! ;)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
And where did you hear that? Your fucking cereal box? The fact that you believe so stongly in something you cannot prove only shows your arrogance and hipocracy. Your assurance in something that's so theorized astounds me! I could sit here and argue with you all day that your theories hold absolutely no weight, because that's what they are, theories, but you will only hear what you want to hear and I can't waist anymore of my time when we're just going around in circles.
And I believe in evolution because that's the best explenation, yet! - It has facts to support it, and it's science under progress.. That means that if points of evolution is inaccurate, we'll work to improve those points.
I didn't take it from my cereal box.. I took it from my logic. The best explenation we have is evolution, because we already know that we have DNA, RNA, Chromosomes and observable mutations! And with bad mutations, we die.. Natural selection!
I think Bach tried to experiment integrity of humanity. God is for us, anytime, anymoment of our life. We cannot see God unless we truely ask for Him!
I am also atheist and (not "but") I love baroque music. Artistic expression is just artistic expression. There are many themes on which we can express ourselves in an artistic way. In that time the recurrent themes were the religious ones but these don't make Bach more or less artistic. I think if he have written about Mohamed or about evolution, he remains the same incredible artistic genius.
The same? I don't think so. Bach believed that Jesus died for him. The supreme act of love and sacrifice. Without that inspiration this never could have been done.
Great artists express anger, joy, fear, love; but as jsorel3 said, this music is out of this world!
His belief gave him the motivation and the themes for creating but they haven't given him his geniality. If he was born in a different context,his wonderful brain would choose different themes for his artistic work. To show you that choosing a theme and creating on that theme are two different processes,I tell you about Alessandro Stradella. He created beautiful religious music but he attempted to steal the Catholic church and he was a womanizer. Two different things:choosing theme and creating
he was a religious person and he felt his own way. Probably if he was a "latin lover" he could find the same "art" he had inside, in his cortex, in other things. Lots of atheis wrote beatiful music!
Bach would never write so beautyful and perfect piece if he didn't belive in God so much, and didn't ask God for impressions and talent to make a nearly perfect, monumental, and genial piece like Matthew Passion. Y'know how it is, with God everything is possible, and you can reach the people with music, coz God let's you to write great composition. But if you don't ask Him, you never reach these highs.
what about Ludwig van Beethoven? Was he a genius? He was atheist. Other atheist musicians: Hector Berlioz, Alexandre Cesar Leopold "Georges" Bizet, Pierre Boulez, Johannes Brahms, etc. The fact that you like classical music is just a matter of preference. Others like old Chinese opera (like Tang Kung Han Si) which probably you won't like. Why is Bach's music inspired by God? Because you like it?
you mentioned a lot, but no one of these composrs reached that level! Bach is a monster. Biggest than anyone in music! His works are really complex, you couldnt put just one note in it, coz than it would be wrong. His works are about logic and counting like a math example, but they still sounds wonderful. I know what im talkin bout coz im learning it in Bela Bartok Conservatory.
Bach uses a lot of things from Bible. He said that, if he's using the same logic that God used during the creation, than it means that Bach is praising the Lord. So he took a lot of things from the Bible. For example in vocals: Tenor Alto Soprano = Father Son and Holy Spirit. And if the lyrics talk about the Christ, then the alto vocalists have an important part in music. And so on... a lot of other things..
and one other thing, i prefer jazz, and i mostly play jazz, coz thats what i really like, but we learn classical in school and i say that jazz is only pop music in front of classical composers. coz its not as sophisticated. And any other music is just less sophisticated than jazz, so those styles are really under classical music. For example: Not in classical, but in evry popular music, there are chords, but one chord follows an other, and then comes an other chord, and so on.
But in classical its not that way. Classical isnt about chords. Its about bass tenor alto soprano, and the phrases. And yes they sounds somtimes like a Cmajor9 or a Gminor#5, but thats not any Cmajor9, or any Gminor#5. Thats just that one kind of chord, only perfectly with those intervals. So its not really sophisticated to express music in chords. And there are a lot of sounds which you cant tell in any chord names.
Music like this could have only be written by someone that has a deep faith and respect for God. If Bach had not understood and experience sincere faith he would not have been able to express what he had in this Passion. The feelings expressed in arias like Erbarme dich prove that Bach saw himself as a sinner just like St.Peter and had a pious regret for his sins. He also proved his love and respect for Christ. All this wouldn't happen if he did not believe that Jesus Christ is his Savior.
baifulong made a point: people from different parts of the world like different types of music. For a Chinese, Bach doesn't seem godly inspired, for you a Chinese composer doesn't seem godly inspired. Do you say that Bach is inspired by God because you like his music? What other reasons do you have for saying that Bach is particularly inspired by God? If you feel his music is better, he might be favourized by God more than other musicians, no?
But there is only One God and One faith and all that is inspired by this faith is inspired by God. I would find a Chinese composer's works moving as well if they expressed sincere faith! I find many such works outside the western culture and Church I belong to. To me such are, for example, many corals and chants originating in Orthodox churches.
Let's say that is one god but there are obviously many faiths. I guess you have some preferences, you don't like evenly all religious music and you like non-religious music too. Maybe Bach is in the top of your preferences so he is blessed by god with more talent than others. What do we do with non-religious music you like? Are those composers favourized by god too? Other people have a different top of preferences in music. Does God work according to your taste or another person's taste?
I did not say he is favored by God more than others, but that his expression of faith is true and sincere, an expression of a faithful man. It's not just about talent of a man. You can have all the talent of the world, but without faith you couldn't write something like this.
Bach's faith gave him the motivation to write on religious themes but didn't give him the talent. Why? Because there were other composers of his time but many of them are forgotten. Were all of them less religious than Bach? Their music was less good than Bach's creation. I witnessed in American churches grotesque shows with guitar and drums and bad music. Does that make the composers less religious? Their music will not live too much so, if faith makes one create better, their faith is missing.
One of course needs talent to express his faith trough music, but if one has no faith than there is nothing to be expressed, to make such music you need both. An artists does what he knows and understands. I he knows no faith he can really successfully not write music about it. But I will quit discussing about this matter because I see I achieve nothing and am just spending my time and words.
ok, we have to draw a line and clarify: Bach's faith gave him the motivation and his talent made him capable of creating this beautiful religious music. This is what I was saying before and now you say the same thing.
So, you agree that he was not inspired by God to write this music, yes?
No! Without his faith he could never write something like this. It is not just a matter of motivation, that is what I was trying to say. There is more to it than just a motivation.
If I could take a stab at this argument, I'd have to agree with Gabrijelguber. While those people in American churches may lack talent, (or, more likely, are just bad at making more modern music that doesn't really fit the theme,) without faith, Bach would have no guidance. He saw the beautiful patterns that he could create in music as divinely inspired. To take the Chinese example, if a composer from China had a faith in a divine force, it would probably help him greatly in his composition.
Also, I have never listened to a secularly inspired piece that is as impressive to me as sacred music (with the exception of John Williams). If this is my personal bias, It is probably because I tend to like classical and rennaisance music, which tend to be religious because of their time period. Modern music doesn't really impress me, and this time period is also much more secular. However, I stand by the idea that faith and divine inspiration have a hand in how beautiful sacred music is.
I think you are right Hesperell, it isn't just your "personal bias", there is something different about the feeling of secular and sacred music. For example, mozart's music( although i love his music) is very different from what you feel after listening to bach. I believe this flows not just from any natual abiliy or talent, but from their own faith in God and personal religious beliefs.
Your religious belief is valid, but to say that mine is based on illusion, hallucination, and schizophrenia is an insult to me and all of the people of faith worldwide. Just because people like Bach, me, and the billions of others don't share your beliefs, it doesn't mean that they are all somehow mentally defective. The people that wrote our holy books could not have corroborated the same stories and themes if they were all illusion. The disciples were swayed by something much more concrete.
Well then, a little insult should be able to be manageble by a person who has strong faith like you hmm? I mean, I can handle the dayly barrage of insults from religious peeps. I hear that I am a unforgiveble sinner (Mark 3:29), that I am a bad person and that I don't have any purpose in life etc. etc.
And well, let's not get into discussion over religion here now. Experience has tought me that discussions with strogly religious people is... Rather futile.
I know you don't want to continue this discussion; and I respect your attempt to have the last word, but I'd just like to give some background. I wasn't brought up religiously, I just came to it because I feel it gives me a sense of purpose and helps me be a good person. The Bible also gives us many inspiring quotes. I'm sorry if you feel a book is insulting you.
And if anyone decides to judge you and "barrage" you with insults, tell them to let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
I think their rendition is on the Discover Baroque CD . . . I will have to check that but I would KNOW the sound anywhere. No one else does it better!
btw If I am wrong (on either accounts) and someone knows either who actually did the recording for Naxos that would be great-and if there are better versions of this I would love to know that too :)
Ok I was wrong-If anyone is interested I think the best version is the one on the Naxos CD played by the Hungarian State Symphony Orchestra-Geza Oberfrank was the conductor. Although the version in the video is good it really does pale in comparison.
Yes, it's out on CD and DVD. You can find it at any good record store, but your best bet is to get it through Amazon. Amazon has a feature now where you can download the entire record onto your computer (iTunes, Windows Media, etc) and burn it onto a CD (great sound quality, too). Plus downloading, rather than ordering, saves time and money. The actual CDs cost about $40-50, while downloading through Amazon is only about $17, and perfectly legal, too.
Una de las verdaderas obras maestras, una de las más grandes obras de arte de la historia de la humanidad. Grande fue Bach. La Interpretación magistral.
Grazie per aver pubblicato questo concerto. Musica sublime e interpreti superbi. Grazie ancora!
Monteverdiforever 3 weeks ago
All this debate about God, and no-one comes up with a definition of God. Have you ever asked yourself where your consciousness comes from? No-one knows; brain scientists are at a loss. I propose that any process complex enough develops a consciousness. The most complex process there is is the universe itself, with all its sub-processes. I therefore believe it has a consciousness, and this consciousness I call "God". Mark that this is a totally different God than that of the Christian religion.
BaldJean 2 months ago
einfach nur wunderbar,joyces
11joyces 4 months ago
Maravilloso!, Bacholoji. Gracias.
runofear 9 months ago
Can someone tell me what that instrument that looks like a giant lute is called ???
Manzie1000 10 months ago
@Manzie1000
It is called a theorbo.
055697 9 months ago
@Manzie1000 Hi, I think it is a cello.
jocelialima58 2 weeks ago
c'est géniale bravo!
MsPagnier 11 months ago
One of the greatest works of western music, very well performed here. With all the rubbish on the net, welcome to some world-class music!
poettli 1 year ago 3
Who's the tenor soloist?
Brideshead09 1 year ago
@Brideshead09
Paul Agnew
janwillemkl 1 year ago
Quelle pure merveille!merci
saudadedefados 1 year ago
thanks again. I may have mentioned it before, but some things keep worth reminding>we played this at the funural of my mother, And that was good.....
amriirma 1 year ago
@amriirma All of them?
FretboardToAsh 1 year ago
The conductor's expression really is, exhilarating. He's completely into the music, as if he were moving every element of the world with his movements.
FretboardToAsh 1 year ago
Vielen, vielen dank, Bach, Koopman, Amsterdam Barock Orchester, und Bacholoji für das Komponieren, Vorführen, und Hochladen dieser wunderbaren Passion!
b0ttomzone 1 year ago
Passionszeit -ich hörte die Passion erstmals während des Krieges
aljoscha24 1 year ago 3
Thanks Bacholoji
cbrody 1 year ago
Wir setzen uns mit Tränen nieder
Und rufen dir im Grabe zu:
Ruhe sanfte, sanfte ruh!
This is so beautiful ...... the pearl in Europe's crown.
Haaglander 2 years ago 11
Muchas gracias, desde Bogotá Colombia
sayimsamir 2 years ago
Wonderful. Thank you so much for posting
ferdiriordan 2 years ago
Muchas gracias hombre, thank you very much, Bacholoji!!
Saludos desde Perú
gibson667dlcv 2 years ago 2
The very best of TK that I've heard.
1401JSC 2 years ago
Thank you Bacholoji for this post. Do you have any info on where this was filmed? Thanks again.
ravichandra70 2 years ago
Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra + Choir, directed by Ton Koopman, recorded in St. Jorischurch, Amersfoort, The Netherlands in 2005
HBteHn 2 years ago
Gracias amigo Bacholoji por este placer tan grande que nos has proporcionado subiendo esta hermosa obra de Bach a YouTube.
Un abrazo!!!
Cibermancho 2 years ago 5
Wonderful, Bach is great.
225gabi 2 years ago 2
no es de este mundo
osomiski 2 years ago 2
about expressing gratitude to whomever uploaded this -- Sir/Madam, there was a distinct possibility I would have never heard this if it wasn't for your generosity and willingness to take one's time to do it. I am certain to speak on behalf of hundreds of others: you have made our lives richer. Thx. Danke. Merci. Gracias.
almosten 2 years ago 46
So nice of you! Yes, this is one of music's absolute masterpieces of all ages. Everybody should be made to listen to Bach's music, even by force :-)
bersa888 2 years ago
Extraordinario este final de la sion segun San Mateo.¡Obra maestra!.
debartzen 2 years ago
Man, today I watched the whole passion you've uploaded... Now I just finished! I just can say thanks for this great gift! :-)
TommasoCorvaja 2 years ago 3
este oratorio es particularmente hermoso, bach es un maestro de la composicion y lo elogio.Creo que este oratorio es de los mas bonitos que hay aunque es el unico que he escuchado pero me encanto
thank you bacholoji
merci bacholoji
gracias bachologi
grazie bacholoji
ligth95 2 years ago
I especially like 67, although I think it should be sung much slower than this. The choir part is way more beautiful with a lower paste.
ChrNGK 2 years ago
thank you for the music.
Lesamisdeloeillet 2 years ago 2
What a true work of art. Bach must've pulled a lot of all-nighters to get this one done.
And btw, mhow99 and Thymonico: instead of arguing about science and religion, how about sitting back and enjoying this music as it's author intended?
LLWChampion 2 years ago 5
In fact most of the works came of the shelf... Bach used works he had already composed and used them for the Mattheus Passion.
markpelledevries 2 years ago 2
@markpelledevries
I think most of the people, do know that.
So what ? I don`t see what way your message go ?
^^
ArtemisSpira 1 year ago
What sins am I to repent?
And, how can I believe in Jesus when I have not seen the evidence for him. It's impossible! I can try as hard as I like and I still wouldn't be able to actually believe in him, I'm too rational.
Thymonico 2 years ago
To respond the correct way to this how can i believe im trying really hard thing one would have to say that you cannot believe on your own. It is the work of the Holy Spirit who creates faith in the hearts of the faithful. This comes from interaction with the word and sacrament. You cannot believe on your own. There are many sins to repent, such as disbelief. Why do you need evidence to believe in someone? Do you believe i exist? You have not seen me.
mhow999 2 years ago
"Why do you need evidence to believe in someone?"
Why would I believe in someone unless there was evidence. Do you believe in Brahma? No, you don't - that's because if you did, your Biblical God would torture you for eternity. There's no proof that makes God more likely than Brahma (or the Flying Spaghetti Monster), neither is there proof that makes Brahma more likely than God!
Thymonico 2 years ago
"There are many sins to repent, such as disbelief."
Is that a sin that I commit by not having been presented any evidence for God? I could've tried believing in God right now, it wouldn't work as I need evidence in order to truly believe in anything. If I'm going to be sent to hell for not beliving something there is no evidience for, that proves God is evil (if he existed - which he doesn't).
Thymonico 2 years ago
You are stuck in the modern mindset in an ever increasing post modern world. This is what the church has to look forward to. Science and Reason have created the greatest evils known to man. People are fleeing in greater numbers from scientific reason to other things that are outside of themselves.
mhow999 2 years ago
How and why does scientific reason create the greatest evils known to man.
"People are fleeing in greater numbers from scientific reason."
Where? Who? From what?
Thymonico 2 years ago
Science has created weapons of war that do horrible evil. Atom Bombs, Agent Orange, Napalm, Biological Weapons and so on. But even in our most well intended scientific discoveries we can have bad outcomes. Such as the spermicide nonoxynol-9 is meant to prevent unintended pregnancy but it really facilitates the spread of aids. Science has done a lot of good ill admit, but it has also caused much evil. The general feeling among people is shifting, you can see this tv shows about paranormal.
mhow999 2 years ago
Science causes evil in the same way that gravity causes suicide by jumping off bridges. Without science, we'd be nude, dead and starving. You can't blame evil on science, blame it on misusing science. I don't think we can enjoy the benefits of science without the risk of someone misusing it. ;)
Thymonico 2 years ago 3
Perhaps the same is true of blaming religion of all the evils in the world? The real question is why do people misuse science? Perhaps because they are guided by their own selfish ambitions, and in some cases, Reason. For example reason would dictate that the use of the atom bomb to end WW2 was a logical use of a weapon of war. The truth of the matter is that it was and still continues to be wrong. We havent used the majority of our WMD's but we still keep them. good discussion...:-)
mhow999 2 years ago
Blaming religion for all the evils in the world is stupid, altough I find that religion is to blame for most of it.
"Perhaps because they are guided by their own selfish ambitions, and in some cases, Reason."
Reason dependant on what your axioms, or goals, are. If we base everything on trying to do good and preventing evil, WMD is wrong.
I think that the idea behind the atomic bomb, to threaten the world into peace, was a good idea, but it didn't happen.
Thymonico 2 years ago
Well, it's neutral; I think there's a DISCOURSE of science that can be harmful - the idea that the "scientific method" (you can only believe what you can empirically prove, and that you MUST believe everything empirical) should be applied to all aspects of life was one of the main things that enabled communism and fascism in the last century. However, science as KNOWLEDGE (not as a discourse) is generally quite beneficial. The latter has always existed without the former.
CactusHazretleri 2 years ago
"Do you believe i exist?"
You wrote words to me, therefore you exist.
Thymonico 2 years ago
The Bible was inspired by God, however i will assume you dont believe in that ;). Do you believe that a man named Jesus Christ could have actually existed? There are also many accounts in extra biblical documents that parallel what we find in the Scriptures. There are also many examples from scripture that fortell the coming events. Daniel is a prime example, or Isaiah's prophecy about the fall of Babylon. Faith v Reason 101. Neither side will convince the other.
mhow999 2 years ago
I think there's a great likelyhood of a man named Jesus existed, altough I don't believe he was born out of a virgin or invented a method to transmutate water into wine.
Mind telling me more about those prophecies? I'd be grateful.
Thymonico 2 years ago
certainly. Isaiah 45 is where the prophecy of Cyrus the Great is located. As you may well know the return of the jews out of Babylon after the Exile occured in 538-536 BC. Isaiah was writing during the Kings Uzziah through Hezekiah of Judah, which is approximately 767-699 BC. The prophecy of the Statue in Daniel is interesting as well in which he tells of a statue with 4 parts. Gold, Silver, Bronze and Iron, relating to the 4 great empires, Babylon, MedoPersia, Greece and Rome. Check it out.
mhow999 2 years ago
I am so glad I know Him of whom this work was written. I am sure that JS Bach knew Him, and trust that you do too.
almosten 2 years ago 2
shut up folks
LambChowder1 2 years ago 4
Ton Koopman is one of the greatest musicians of our era.
LutzKranenborg 2 years ago
Amazing performance. Makes me cry everytime. Theres no better way to express the suffering of Jesus.
jls850807 2 years ago
Was sind das bei 1:30 für peinliche Vorhalte...
minibeb 2 years ago
Molto bello.
Complimenti.
ErikaRagazzi 2 years ago
Is it me or does the woman on the right, looks like Gordon Brown's wife?
89murph 2 years ago
The soloists and chorus did a fantastic job; the diction may not be perfect, but I can hear and follow most of the eight choral parts!
As for the religious debate, what difference does it make whether God exists if people cannot agree on what "believing in God" means (both in an intellectual sense and through one's actions & lifestyle)? If only I could find the time to read the works of Wittgenstein...
LiberLucis 2 years ago
Quia Bach erat, Deus est. Num contra dicas?
NihilNominis 2 years ago
Sed quid est "est"?
LiberLucis 2 years ago
Gratias tibi, Clinton, ago. :D
NihilNominis 2 years ago
bach and god....
velvengrond 3 years ago
simply wonderful!
rits92 3 years ago
To all those who think that Bach was helped by god. I think it's a big insult to the man's talent to think he could not come op with this by himself.
And yes, this is an atheist speaking.
DeHeld8 3 years ago
amen.
livardo 3 years ago
I just can't get why atheists have to convince everyone. If they don't believe in a God, Why do they care in the first place?
"Thank God, I don't believe in God"
Don't make such a show of your philosophy. Man has a great talent and is capable of many things, that's absolutely true. But there are some people who believe all human talent is a manifestation of some higher force. Respectable, don't you think?
sagarzon 3 years ago
Those that believe and those that refuse to believe, usually out of hate. This is why they are so concerned with pushing their non-beliefs on on others. Love one another...just as I have loved you....
LifesaGardenDigit1 3 years ago
If someone believes that 2+2 equals 3, wouldn't you try to convince them that 2+2 equals 4 with a very logical and basic example of counting the fingers?
In Religion, it just doesn't work that way, because religious people are afraid to count their fingers.. Because they might just end up with counting exactly 4.
Or maybe this was a terrible example because 2+2 really equals 3.. ("SHUT UP! IT DOES!")..
ATHEIST: (2+2 = 4)
RELIGIOUS: (2+2 = 3)
Heeheehee.. ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
Shame you all for arguing while standing front of this greatest of all music!
Mmyra12 3 years ago 5
Ok, I'm sorry.. If anything is holy, Bach is! ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
I'd love to here why you don't believe in God. The fact is most people who don't believe in God have a superiority complex. I myself am unsure of God's exsistance, but that unasurance came from reflective thought and self -analyis. It did not come from me thinking I was smarter than everybody else and the delusioned thought that religion is for the foolish, as it seems to be with most cases. Certainty is a disease ( that you seem to have) and you should never be certain about it.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
I am not saying that religion is for the foolish, rather: theistic people shuold know better. In most cases it's through ignorance rather than research and knowledge that people believe in something completely without evidence.
If you are near or over the middle of the Agnostic scale, look up "Russel's Teapot"..
And I'm anything else than a theism/deism-prejudist..
What's a superiority complex?
Thymonico 3 years ago
It means that they have a very high opinion of oneself and feel threatened by anything that states that they are not the most superior thing in existance. Despite most claims there is no proof that disproves the existance or possibility of God. In fact many people argue that there is proof supporting the idea of God. Most atheists don't do ther own research they just swallow what someone else says and then claim they are the more intelligent beings. I have little respect for people like that.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
I've already opened my eyes to the possibility, but I've also opened my eyes to the possibility of Allah, Brahma, The Flying Spaghetti Monster and The Invisible Pink Unicorn..
I'm defined as an agnostic tending to complete atheism by Richard Dawkins' scale og agnosticism. Again, have a short look at Russel's Teapot in Wikipedia..
You are also an atheist about most theistic deities.. You don't believe in Odin, Zeus and all those gods.. I just go one god further..
Thymonico 3 years ago
I believe there is just as good of a chance of there being allah or zues or any other god as there is the chance of there being the christian god. But about the flying spaghetti monster;most intelligent people who have commen sense and have done extensive research on it will agree that the possibility of a higher form of intelligence is much more likely than there being a material substance with no higher brain function running around. So I have to stop you there and ask you to think a bit more
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
Not really my point.. The point is that the probability for either is so low that the difference doesn't matter!
0,000000000000000000000000000000000001
vs
0,00000000000000000000000000000000000000001
or
0,00000000000000000000000000000001
See?
Thymonico 3 years ago
That's not true. It is very probable that there is a god. You're just refusing to open your eyes. Just remember the only real wisdom is knowing you know nothing at all. And you did get that frome South Park!
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No, it's not probable that there is a god..
Rather, there is a huge propability that there is something unknown which we will work to find out..
If we don't know something, we don't fill the empty gap with imaginary things.. We figure it out through the scientific method, until it's not unknown..
Eyes all open, Venomfang X has some interesting explenations of why god exists, altough.. The Aquinas theory of the first starter.. I think it's unkown, not the god that defies laws of physics.. ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
The flying spaghetti monster; did you get that off of South Park?
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
Please pick up a copy of "The Bible God's Word or Man's" I'm not saying it will convince you of God but it definately opens your eyes to the possibility.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
Ok.. Russel's Teapot:
If I say that there was an invisible, non-material teapot orbiting around mars.. It would have been impossible to disprove it, but the probability of it beeing there is another matter.. Atheism is defined as no belief in any form of theism. Religion is claiming something without evidence, thus the burden lies on theism to affirm the existence on something.. Rather than atheism to disprove something disprovable..
Oui? ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
I did look at that, and again I say that the possibility of Earth being created is far more likely than a teapot floating around Mars. I disagree with your assumption that it is up to a religion to prove that there is a god. Why would it be up to them? And don't atheists believe in evolution? By your logic wouldn't it be up to them to prove it. You might say they have but the big bang theory has many holes, and discrepencies in it. Just as many as the theory of god.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
NO! Not as many as the delusion of god.
Atheists commonly believe in evolution because that is the theory of which most evidence procured by the scientific method point to.. There's no evidence for god, contrary there is evidence for evolution.. They might be vague (I don't think so) but at least they're there!
Same with the big bang theory, many holes.. Because it is work in progress, not wild assumptions! ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
Actually if you would do some research you would find that there is no actual proof supporting the theory of evolution, and all it is is one gigantic assumption. And the so called proof they found can just as easily support the exsistance of God.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
So, things like genome mutations and heriditery DNA are non existant, and what we can see in microscopes are non-existant?
And the similarity in bones of earlier homo's (homo as in neandertalic descritption, 'homo sapiens') are just because they're from the same designer.. That designer is non-material, omni-potent and has a conscious? .. C'mon!..
Thymonico 3 years ago
Thymonico,
To be quite frank: what the hell is this? Give it a rest. Bach was a devout Christian who wrote Christian music. Clearly many of the people listening to it will be Christians. Let us meditate upon Christ's passion without being confronted by your atheist gospel.
There is nothing we need to hear in what you're spewing at us. If you would deny the words of eternal life, then all of our tomorrows resolve into oblivion, and what we believed makes no difference. Theism or nihilism.
NihilNominis 2 years ago
Oh, I see, the legion of militant atheists and corps of internet apologists had a large battle last month, of which you were but a small part.
Let me address both parties, then. Being a veteran of such debates: no one is impressed by hearing you repeat others' arguments a thousand times (cf. CFSM). If you can't add something new to the debate, don't.
I feel that if this were an observed rule, only the truly intelligent would have this debate. The discussions would be much smaller.
NihilNominis 2 years ago
What does Bach's religious stand have to do with the hypothesis of God or the place for such a debate?
Thymonico 2 years ago
It seems your Latin is not *quite* up to par. It is a Latin restatement of "Since there was Bach, there is God" :)
I'm not about to have a scientific-method debate about a "God-hypothesis". I don't propose Him on scientific, but rather philosophical grounds. I have two nervous breakdowns to attest that, were I not a Christian, I would be mad, literally.
You are of course free to have your views, and I do apologise for my anger, but I have left the world of theism-debating for-ever.
NihilNominis 2 years ago
"were I not a Christian, I would be mad, literally."
So Christian is another word for mad as it is so easily substituted?.. No, I understand what you mean... but believing in something to escape madness really has nothing to do with the something's propability of existing.. ;)
You don't need to reply to that part.. As we both know it's only going to lead to a fierce debate of God's existence..
And thanks for the latin! :)
Thymonico 2 years ago
I will leave you only with this:
What is necessary and what is true often coincide. I think you know what I mean... ;)
NihilNominis 2 years ago
Debates and discussions are vital for a healthy community!
If no one debated the hypothesis of flat-earth, young-earth or geocentricity, they would still be valid!
I am debating my view of the hypothesis of a magical and loving creator. It's completely absurd! And should be treated as what it is!
I'll happily engage in this very important (and very tiresome) debate.
I love Bach! :D
He's without doubt the best composer of the Baroque era!
Thymonico 2 years ago
Comment removed
bersa888 2 years ago
Comment removed
bersa888 2 years ago
If I state that there was a Teapot floating around mars.. It would be close to impossible to disprove it, but that doesn't make it likely.. Therefore one should rather prove it is there rather than cite "You can't disprove it, therefore it is there!"..
Evolution is also something that must be proven:
- Why do you think we have nails?
- Because god wanted to give humans a tool to better scratch themselves? No, I think not.. It's the remains of DNA-compositions that were useful as claws! ;)
Thymonico 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And where did you hear that? Your fucking cereal box? The fact that you believe so stongly in something you cannot prove only shows your arrogance and hipocracy. Your assurance in something that's so theorized astounds me! I could sit here and argue with you all day that your theories hold absolutely no weight, because that's what they are, theories, but you will only hear what you want to hear and I can't waist anymore of my time when we're just going around in circles.
pinkfloydnumber1 3 years ago
What did I get from South Park?
And I believe in evolution because that's the best explenation, yet! - It has facts to support it, and it's science under progress.. That means that if points of evolution is inaccurate, we'll work to improve those points.
I didn't take it from my cereal box.. I took it from my logic. The best explenation we have is evolution, because we already know that we have DNA, RNA, Chromosomes and observable mutations! And with bad mutations, we die.. Natural selection!
Thymonico 3 years ago
Wrong place
LambChowder1 2 years ago
He started it! ;)
Thymonico 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GOD!!
So less bible bashing please sir, and get some morals you worthless piece of crap!
89murph 2 years ago
I think Bach tried to experiment integrity of humanity. God is for us, anytime, anymoment of our life. We cannot see God unless we truely ask for Him!
visitationvirginmary 3 years ago
It's a surprise that someone ACTUALLY capitalized Him. you really don't see many people do that anymore.
ShadowMosesGreen 3 years ago
das grinsen am ende is so geil :D
schnetziiiii 3 years ago
ookdit is wer absolute topklasse!!!!!!!!!!
fido123456789fido 3 years ago
Bach en Koopmans = synoniem.
Perfect!
luciesneep 3 years ago 3
It's hard to fathom the genious of Bach. Especially when I have yet to hear anything of Bach's that does not please my ears.
Bravo.
wolf87410 3 years ago 3
I'm atheist, but this music cann't to be written for any human being.
jsorel3 3 years ago 13
I am also atheist and (not "but") I love baroque music. Artistic expression is just artistic expression. There are many themes on which we can express ourselves in an artistic way. In that time the recurrent themes were the religious ones but these don't make Bach more or less artistic. I think if he have written about Mohamed or about evolution, he remains the same incredible artistic genius.
felixpetrar 3 years ago 4
The same? I don't think so. Bach believed that Jesus died for him. The supreme act of love and sacrifice. Without that inspiration this never could have been done.
Great artists express anger, joy, fear, love; but as jsorel3 said, this music is out of this world!
plasticPlaystation 3 years ago 2
His belief gave him the motivation and the themes for creating but they haven't given him his geniality. If he was born in a different context,his wonderful brain would choose different themes for his artistic work. To show you that choosing a theme and creating on that theme are two different processes,I tell you about Alessandro Stradella. He created beautiful religious music but he attempted to steal the Catholic church and he was a womanizer. Two different things:choosing theme and creating
felixpetrar 3 years ago 3
he was a religious person and he felt his own way. Probably if he was a "latin lover" he could find the same "art" he had inside, in his cortex, in other things. Lots of atheis wrote beatiful music!
lumikide 3 years ago 3
Bach would never write so beautyful and perfect piece if he didn't belive in God so much, and didn't ask God for impressions and talent to make a nearly perfect, monumental, and genial piece like Matthew Passion. Y'know how it is, with God everything is possible, and you can reach the people with music, coz God let's you to write great composition. But if you don't ask Him, you never reach these highs.
qlm86ooe 3 years ago
what about Ludwig van Beethoven? Was he a genius? He was atheist. Other atheist musicians: Hector Berlioz, Alexandre Cesar Leopold "Georges" Bizet, Pierre Boulez, Johannes Brahms, etc. The fact that you like classical music is just a matter of preference. Others like old Chinese opera (like Tang Kung Han Si) which probably you won't like. Why is Bach's music inspired by God? Because you like it?
baifulong 3 years ago
you mentioned a lot, but no one of these composrs reached that level! Bach is a monster. Biggest than anyone in music! His works are really complex, you couldnt put just one note in it, coz than it would be wrong. His works are about logic and counting like a math example, but they still sounds wonderful. I know what im talkin bout coz im learning it in Bela Bartok Conservatory.
qlm86ooe 2 years ago
Comment removed
qlm86ooe 2 years ago
Bach uses a lot of things from Bible. He said that, if he's using the same logic that God used during the creation, than it means that Bach is praising the Lord. So he took a lot of things from the Bible. For example in vocals: Tenor Alto Soprano = Father Son and Holy Spirit. And if the lyrics talk about the Christ, then the alto vocalists have an important part in music. And so on... a lot of other things..
qlm86ooe 2 years ago
and one other thing, i prefer jazz, and i mostly play jazz, coz thats what i really like, but we learn classical in school and i say that jazz is only pop music in front of classical composers. coz its not as sophisticated. And any other music is just less sophisticated than jazz, so those styles are really under classical music. For example: Not in classical, but in evry popular music, there are chords, but one chord follows an other, and then comes an other chord, and so on.
qlm86ooe 2 years ago
But in classical its not that way. Classical isnt about chords. Its about bass tenor alto soprano, and the phrases. And yes they sounds somtimes like a Cmajor9 or a Gminor#5, but thats not any Cmajor9, or any Gminor#5. Thats just that one kind of chord, only perfectly with those intervals. So its not really sophisticated to express music in chords. And there are a lot of sounds which you cant tell in any chord names.
qlm86ooe 2 years ago
Music like this could have only be written by someone that has a deep faith and respect for God. If Bach had not understood and experience sincere faith he would not have been able to express what he had in this Passion. The feelings expressed in arias like Erbarme dich prove that Bach saw himself as a sinner just like St.Peter and had a pious regret for his sins. He also proved his love and respect for Christ. All this wouldn't happen if he did not believe that Jesus Christ is his Savior.
Gabrijelguber 3 years ago
baifulong made a point: people from different parts of the world like different types of music. For a Chinese, Bach doesn't seem godly inspired, for you a Chinese composer doesn't seem godly inspired. Do you say that Bach is inspired by God because you like his music? What other reasons do you have for saying that Bach is particularly inspired by God? If you feel his music is better, he might be favourized by God more than other musicians, no?
felixpetrar 3 years ago 4
But there is only One God and One faith and all that is inspired by this faith is inspired by God. I would find a Chinese composer's works moving as well if they expressed sincere faith! I find many such works outside the western culture and Church I belong to. To me such are, for example, many corals and chants originating in Orthodox churches.
Gabrijelguber 3 years ago
Let's say that is one god but there are obviously many faiths. I guess you have some preferences, you don't like evenly all religious music and you like non-religious music too. Maybe Bach is in the top of your preferences so he is blessed by god with more talent than others. What do we do with non-religious music you like? Are those composers favourized by god too? Other people have a different top of preferences in music. Does God work according to your taste or another person's taste?
felixpetrar 3 years ago
I did not say he is favored by God more than others, but that his expression of faith is true and sincere, an expression of a faithful man. It's not just about talent of a man. You can have all the talent of the world, but without faith you couldn't write something like this.
Gabrijelguber 3 years ago
Bach's faith gave him the motivation to write on religious themes but didn't give him the talent. Why? Because there were other composers of his time but many of them are forgotten. Were all of them less religious than Bach? Their music was less good than Bach's creation. I witnessed in American churches grotesque shows with guitar and drums and bad music. Does that make the composers less religious? Their music will not live too much so, if faith makes one create better, their faith is missing.
felixpetrar 3 years ago 4
One of course needs talent to express his faith trough music, but if one has no faith than there is nothing to be expressed, to make such music you need both. An artists does what he knows and understands. I he knows no faith he can really successfully not write music about it. But I will quit discussing about this matter because I see I achieve nothing and am just spending my time and words.
eGuber 3 years ago
ok, we have to draw a line and clarify: Bach's faith gave him the motivation and his talent made him capable of creating this beautiful religious music. This is what I was saying before and now you say the same thing.
So, you agree that he was not inspired by God to write this music, yes?
felixpetrar 3 years ago 2
No! Without his faith he could never write something like this. It is not just a matter of motivation, that is what I was trying to say. There is more to it than just a motivation.
Gabrijelguber 3 years ago
I don't care. If you didn't get it until now, I don't care. Be it in the way you want.
felixpetrar 3 years ago 2
I let it be in the way you want. You won :)))
felixpetrar 3 years ago
Thank you, but I didn't won as long as I didn't convinced you, so Id rather call it a tide:))
Gabrijelguber 3 years ago
If I could take a stab at this argument, I'd have to agree with Gabrijelguber. While those people in American churches may lack talent, (or, more likely, are just bad at making more modern music that doesn't really fit the theme,) without faith, Bach would have no guidance. He saw the beautiful patterns that he could create in music as divinely inspired. To take the Chinese example, if a composer from China had a faith in a divine force, it would probably help him greatly in his composition.
Hesperell 3 years ago
Also, I have never listened to a secularly inspired piece that is as impressive to me as sacred music (with the exception of John Williams). If this is my personal bias, It is probably because I tend to like classical and rennaisance music, which tend to be religious because of their time period. Modern music doesn't really impress me, and this time period is also much more secular. However, I stand by the idea that faith and divine inspiration have a hand in how beautiful sacred music is.
Hesperell 3 years ago
I think you are right Hesperell, it isn't just your "personal bias", there is something different about the feeling of secular and sacred music. For example, mozart's music( although i love his music) is very different from what you feel after listening to bach. I believe this flows not just from any natual abiliy or talent, but from their own faith in God and personal religious beliefs.
scluna44 3 years ago
Maybe this is why they say "there is the music of Bach, therefore there is a God"
MilitantTVNetwork 3 years ago
But... God does not exist. And thus all this "divinely inspired music" is based on illusions, hallicunations and schizophrenia.
Music is like all the other arts. A product of human ingenuity.
DeHeld8 3 years ago
Your religious belief is valid, but to say that mine is based on illusion, hallucination, and schizophrenia is an insult to me and all of the people of faith worldwide. Just because people like Bach, me, and the billions of others don't share your beliefs, it doesn't mean that they are all somehow mentally defective. The people that wrote our holy books could not have corroborated the same stories and themes if they were all illusion. The disciples were swayed by something much more concrete.
Hesperell 3 years ago
OOPS! I did it again!
Well then, a little insult should be able to be manageble by a person who has strong faith like you hmm? I mean, I can handle the dayly barrage of insults from religious peeps. I hear that I am a unforgiveble sinner (Mark 3:29), that I am a bad person and that I don't have any purpose in life etc. etc.
And well, let's not get into discussion over religion here now. Experience has tought me that discussions with strogly religious people is... Rather futile.
DeHeld8 3 years ago
I know you don't want to continue this discussion; and I respect your attempt to have the last word, but I'd just like to give some background. I wasn't brought up religiously, I just came to it because I feel it gives me a sense of purpose and helps me be a good person. The Bible also gives us many inspiring quotes. I'm sorry if you feel a book is insulting you.
And if anyone decides to judge you and "barrage" you with insults, tell them to let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
Hesperell 3 years ago
Yes, the Inquisition!!
sasmo63 3 years ago
bravo
fawe4 4 years ago
I think their rendition is on the Discover Baroque CD . . . I will have to check that but I would KNOW the sound anywhere. No one else does it better!
bobbleheadedbudgie 4 years ago
btw If I am wrong (on either accounts) and someone knows either who actually did the recording for Naxos that would be great-and if there are better versions of this I would love to know that too :)
bobbleheadedbudgie 4 years ago
Ok I was wrong-If anyone is interested I think the best version is the one on the Naxos CD played by the Hungarian State Symphony Orchestra-Geza Oberfrank was the conductor. Although the version in the video is good it really does pale in comparison.
bobbleheadedbudgie 4 years ago
very good version - but then I didn't expect anything else from Koopman & his group. Is it out on CD?
donstefano77 4 years ago
Yes, it's out on CD and DVD. You can find it at any good record store, but your best bet is to get it through Amazon. Amazon has a feature now where you can download the entire record onto your computer (iTunes, Windows Media, etc) and burn it onto a CD (great sound quality, too). Plus downloading, rather than ordering, saves time and money. The actual CDs cost about $40-50, while downloading through Amazon is only about $17, and perfectly legal, too.
norcalrobbie2 3 years ago
Es cierto...BACH=DIOS
76vita2 4 years ago
Even more impressive, Bach = Bach
newsradiohead 3 years ago 3
SUBLIME.... BACH = DIOS
AcantiladoM 4 years ago
wow this is so transcendent. iv never heard of it before. always excited to find new music..esp by Bach!
kensingtonpalace 4 years ago 2
So beautiful.
Haaglander 4 years ago 2
Beautiful!
jumpacliff2 4 years ago 2
Such music changes a man doesn't it? WIth all the messages of peace and only one of a kind harmony that can only comes from Bach.
nakaza3421 4 years ago 2
Bach's music is so beautiful and emotional. Even we agnostics temporarily believe Jesus died to save us.
bbbaz11 4 years ago 5
i would have taken the 68 a bit slower, to accentuate the tragic side of the music. Verry stunnign preformance though
bastyns 4 years ago
Koopman is a genius!
NYCBG 4 years ago 2
This is so beautiful. I get shiverings all over my body when listening to this music.
Haaglander 4 years ago
Bravo! Stupenda, Guten
SetmiphusHeap 4 years ago
Esa segunda menor de los vientos, qué hijo de puta
martinhartmann 4 years ago
the conductor is "Koopman"! Pinnock and Mr.koopman are the best Bach's interpreters.
daredneptune 4 years ago
Let's not neglect Gardiner, he deserves a place in the top three. Actually, I'd tend to place him before Pinnock.
moskva40 4 years ago
Also Georg Biller
Arab0 4 years ago
wat een prachtige uitvoering...kippevel..
Frouwke51 4 years ago
That director is awesome!
livardo 4 years ago
Sorry. Not crush notes but passing notes.
solotyro 4 years ago
The soprano's singing is very beautiful. She adds some crush notes that I've never heard anyone do before, but they are right on.
solotyro 4 years ago
You don't have to be a believer to get goose bumps from listening to this!
NYCBG 5 years ago
I still prefer Leonhardt's rendition.
pickymoon 5 years ago
Una de las verdaderas obras maestras, una de las más grandes obras de arte de la historia de la humanidad. Grande fue Bach. La Interpretación magistral.
remoturbo 5 years ago
A beautiful resolution.
solti 5 years ago
One of the most beautiful choral pieces I've ever heard. The whole performance is magnificent.
Asarim 5 years ago