|
|
Post by reverend on Mar 28, 2021 10:43:34 GMT
so you can't make the connection to self protection?
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 28, 2021 10:45:14 GMT
(Also from a simple common sense point of view - banning images, most of which will be drawn by people who have never seen you to prevent “assassination attempts” is really quite laughable. Have you seen the average portrait? It’s hardly as good as a photo is it!)
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 28, 2021 10:46:36 GMT
so you can't make the connection to self protection? The prohibition came into effect YEARS AFTER HE DIED you blithering idiot. Read the links. It’s not even in the religious texts. If the ban was to prevent him being murdered then it would make better sense to have it in place when he was still alive I would have thought... |
|
flatandy
New Member
Posts: 44,409
Member is Online
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 28, 2021 12:28:41 GMT
Fortunately, Christianity has never had any prohibitions on graven images.
|
|
|
|
Post by wetkingcanute on Mar 28, 2021 12:37:28 GMT
oh look - andy's made a clever remark
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 60,994
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 28, 2021 12:49:41 GMT
Although it is in the Bible:
“You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them”
And in the past, Islam had no problem with images of Mohammed.
|
|
|
|
Post by wetkingcanute on Mar 28, 2021 12:59:37 GMT
True,
and it's all the rampaging mobs of Church of England parishioners that I'm worried about.
Coming round 'er singing hymns n stuff.
|
|
ootlg
New Member
Posts: 10,381
|
Post by ootlg on Mar 28, 2021 13:18:21 GMT
If you blaspheme against C of E jihadists they refuse to give you biscuits with your tea.
|
|
|
|
Post by whiterum on Mar 28, 2021 14:10:23 GMT
Police are on the hunt for a prisoner who escaped while on remand(wormwood scrubs) after being charged with one offence of sexual assault.
BBC news..
The country has gone tory rat sh*t crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 28, 2021 15:49:37 GMT
Fortunately, Christianity has never had any prohibitions on graven images. "a carved idol or representation of a god used as an object of worship." I think the point is that it is an image made for the purpose of idolatry. That being said, there are an awful lot of Christ of the Crosses, although I don't think they are ever placed on altars. |
|
flatandy
New Member
Posts: 44,409
Member is Online
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 28, 2021 15:55:19 GMT
At the moment obviously the Christians don’t give a f**k (apart from a few loonies in the US who read that commandment literally). But there were full blown wars about iconoclasm back in the past. The rules are very clear that religious imagery is all totally forbidden. People just decided that that meant religious imagery of anyone but Jesus, saints or god.
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 60,994
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 28, 2021 16:08:53 GMT
Anyway, Piss-Christ. Much beheading?
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 28, 2021 16:50:31 GMT
Blackface Christ.
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 60,994
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 28, 2021 17:04:51 GMT
Gay Christ.
|
|
flatandy
New Member
Posts: 44,409
Member is Online
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 28, 2021 18:11:55 GMT
You’d be struggling to use the images of white blue eyed Christ as a way of identifying an assassination target. Particularly as he’s usually already on a cross.
|
|
voice
New Member
Goals are a form of self inflicted slavery
Posts: 41,225
Member is Online
|
Post by voice on Mar 28, 2021 18:33:08 GMT
fighting about who is worse, chrtian fuckwhits of islamic fuckwhits is like two bald men fighting for a comb. Time we told the lot of em to fook right off. Its a sorry state of affairs where we protect someone's imaginary friend from insult through either actual or defacto blasphemy laws. It shouldn't matter if the teacher was trying to be edgy and controversial, as long he wasn't showing explicit material to the kids, the school should have backed his academic freedom and told the hand full of snowflake parents to fcuk off.
|
|
flatandy
New Member
Posts: 44,409
Member is Online
|
Post by flatandy on Mar 28, 2021 19:40:44 GMT
I’m not arguing about who’s worse. Right now the Islamic nutters have more nutty control of more countries and more power than the Christian nutters, who are both generally a bit less nutty, and have a bit less control. Even in the US the real nutters don’t have direct control over the levers of power, have to do it by proxy, and remain less nutty than the Saudi or Iranian or Afghan nutters.
Meanwhile, I was merely pointing out that Rev’s weird assertion about Islam having a proscription on graven images of a religious figure for protection from assassination reasons is super weird given that it’s explicitly written out as a core tenet of all the Abrahamic faiths.
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 60,994
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 28, 2021 20:26:08 GMT
Islam's worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 28, 2021 22:29:26 GMT
oh look - andy's made a clever remark I think Andy’s remark is pointing out that a prohibition on graven images is not unusual within the 3 Abrahamic faiths (of which Islam is one.) |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 28, 2021 22:30:04 GMT
Although it is in the Bible: “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” And in the past, Islam had no problem with images of Mohammed. Goodness Mids made a sensible comment?! *Goes to lie down.* |
|
