Article

2004-08-18 Olde Tyme Religion

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2004-08-18 12:00:43 AM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I can't be more precise, total BS. Wally is a Hockpock ass bite so take a picture of this.

Posted by Flamebait93268 2004-08-18 12:12:20 AM|| 2004-08-18 12:12:20 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 It steals your Muslim souls (insha Allah) and no virgins in the afterlife are possible. Same for soap and dentistry.

Posted by ed 2004-08-18 1:38:07 AM|| 2004-08-18 1:38:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 "or making a figure be exalted beyond his humanliness"

Anyone else find yourself wanting clarification of what this is to mean? I guess Jihadist cowards find thier 'humanliness' lacking and have been taking viagra prior to each decapitation video. Guess they'll have a horrible case of blue-balls once they get to paradise and are given a handful of raisins.

Posted by 2% 2004-08-18 1:53:37 AM|| 2004-08-18 1:53:37 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 2% --- I think they might be referring to a Fark.com photoshop contest.

Posted by Asedwich 2004-08-18 4:07:51 AM|| 2004-08-18 4:07:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 What the hell is it with Muslims and their inability to make even simple moral or ethical judgements without asking an imam what to do? Don't these people have any capacity at all for distinguishing right from wrong on a day-to-day basis?

"Asalaamu alaikum"

Up yours too, you ignorant wog.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-08-18 7:25:52 AM|| 2004-08-18 7:25:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I think, therefore I am.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-08-18 7:27:15 AM|| 2004-08-18 7:27:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 What the hell is it with Muslims and their inability to make even simple moral or ethical judgements without asking an imam what to do?

That would lead to them thinking for themselves, which leads to asking questions. Can't have that, mullahs would be out of work. So they are trained from day one not to think.

Posted by Steve 2004-08-18 8:29:37 AM|| 2004-08-18 8:29:37 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Is Digital Photography Haram?

Who cares? If you don't like it, don't use it. Simple as that.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-08-18 10:29:08 AM|| 2004-08-18 10:29:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 The pictures which have been forbidden are the pictures drawn by hand or designed by hand such as cartoons ...

Artistic talent condemned...I had heard about this but does anyone know WHY? Is it because the ability to create representational imagery ("graven images")is considered a threat to God's creative powers?

Flawed though Western culture can be as far as the arts go, I am glad we respect talent and celebrate the gifts of artists like Rembrandt, Michelangelo, Titian, Sargent, Hopper, Freidrich, Monet, Adams...We are not afraid to stand before God with admiration for artistic genius. God is not threatened.

Posted by jules 187 2004-08-18 11:17:34 AM|| 2004-08-18 11:17:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Comes under the "Graven Images" clause of the "Stuff God Don't Like"...

Posted by mojo 2004-08-18 1:56:59 PM|| 2004-08-18 1:56:59 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 What the hell is it with Muslims and their inability to make even simple moral or ethical judgements without asking an imam what to do?

Because it makes everything oh so (mock)intellectual, don't you know. Worrying about exactly how to wipe your *ss in every conceivable situation so that Allen will not become enraged at you and send you to hell for all eternity just shows how super-refined and sensitive your moral sensibilites are.

Don't you know that everyday is absolutely rife with the possibilities of offending Allen for the slightest little thing? Its best to know the law to the nth degree and spend you day obsessing about it so that one might have the least chance of appeasing the most merciful and compassonate one.

Posted by peggy 2004-08-18 2:16:18 PM|| 2004-08-18 2:16:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 jules,

I absolutely agree.

The most telling evidence that mohammed could not see the big picture and had no special knowledge of anything including religion is in cases like these. Its clear that it didn't even occur to him that representative images could have the potential to communicate. All he could see was that art had been abused by some and warped by them into a worship of the created rather than the creator.

The difference between representative art which communicates at a level where words would only get in the way and art which is created to be worshipped in place of God is something that should have been clear to both God and mohammed if he was the prophet that he claimed to be.

Art was in fact not forbidden even in the Hebrew Tabernacle or Temple. They both had direct representations of beasts, plants and fruit for the purpose of beautifying the place. But it was clear to the Jews that these were just that, decorations and not for worship. The first Christians followed that lead and also had art in their places of worship with the clear understanding that these things only pointed to the glory of the one true God. From this proper understanding of art's place in worship we get the first gorgeous icons and frescoes of the Byzantine period and from there the Sistine Chapel, the Pieta etc. From these we derived the concept of art as a means high communication and we were able to see the edifying value of having it and creating it. Our world is the richer for it.

Posted by peggy 2004-08-18 2:41:34 PM|| 2004-08-18 2:41:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Peggy-I like your phrase "the concept of art as a means [of] high communication". That's what the best artwork seems like to me.

Posted by jules 187 2004-08-18 2:53:36 PM|| 2004-08-18 2:53:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Well stated, Peggy. The taboos regarding imagery were probably originally aimed at idolatry, which is the mistaking of an image of a god for the god itself. But in most religions, the literalists tend to dominate, and so we get total prohibitions on perfectly harmless things. Literalists probably tend to dominate because they are able to establish rigid criteria for being a member of the in-group. The less literal-minded people quickly drift into the out-group, even though they may have been closer to the original spiritual teaching.

Posted by virginian 2004-08-18 5:09:35 PM|| 2004-08-18 5:09:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Who cares? If you don't like it, don't use it. Simple as that.

That's not in their world view, it's more, we don't like it so you don't use it or we will cut the head off your Kodak moment.

Posted by Shipman 2004-08-18 5:55:06 PM|| 2004-08-18 5:55:06 PM|| Front Page Top

03:50 Katta
18:29 muck4doo
02:12 Anonymous2u
00:59 Super Hose
00:30 Super Hose
00:24 Super Hose
00:06 True German Ally
00:03 Brutus
23:59 Super Hose
23:57 Pappy
23:57 Seafarious
23:55 Pappy
23:53 Anonymous6108
23:48 Super Hose
23:40 Pappy
23:34 True German Ally
23:28 OldSpook
23:25 OldSpook
23:18 Super Hose
23:18 Capt America
23:15 OldSpook
23:14 AzCat
23:12 Super Hose
23:10 OldSpook