Is God A "white Man" In A Robe?

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

I simply stated it was disturbing...

That's what I was looking for.

He is depicted as people can understand "Him". I simply stated my finding one particular perspective, "disturbing".

True, we all have our understanding.

That might cause problems. Especially if one is ignorant of another's faith. Then you might end up with hundreds dead, over a cartoon....
but that could never happen...right?

True, that is why it is so imparative that we evaluate our depictions.
throughly and see if it would be wise to promote them.

People could be killed for this a things deemed a lot less serious in nature.
i.e.
Riots when a football team wins a game. People get hurt during the celebration.

Faith is a process. Are depicitions a necessary part of it?

 

[Quahom1]

That's what I was looking for.



True, we all have our understanding.





True, that is why it is so imparative that we evaluate our depictions.
throughly and see if it would be wise to promote them.

People could be killed for this a things deemed a lot less serious in nature.
i.e.
Riots when a football team wins a game. People get hurt during the celebration.

Faith is a process. Are depicitions a necessary part of it?

Too late my friend. Hundreds are DEAD, over a bloody cartoon...against the religion of "Peace".

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

People dying over cartoons is truly a tragedy.

That's why I said it is imparative that we evaluate "depictions"... That could possibly lead to such things.

 

[Quahom1]

People dying over cartoons is truly a tragedy.

That's why I said it is imparative that we evaluate "depictions"... That could possibly lead to such things.

Maybe better to leave depictions be...

 

[Dondi]

Actually, now that I thought about it, the picture of an iconic female nullifies the sacrifice. For in the Jewish mind, it was always the umblemished first-born male animal that was fit for sacrifice on the altar. Therefore, to depist a female sacrifice renders everything we know about the method God has chosen in the atonement null and void.

 

[flowperson]

Hello All:

I've been following this discussion for a while, and quite honestly, yo's image posting of the crucified woman makes sense to me for a lot of reasons that should be quite obvious if one is familiar with the social persecutions and overt abuses levied against women by men since we were all created.

Suffering is not a gender specific phenomenon represented by a single man in history. The use of the image of Jesus on the cross advises us of the universality of suffering for men and women alike throughout history. Jesus' demonstrated partiality to women in the stories passed on to us all demonstrates his assent with this aspect of the gender divide. We are all brothers and sisters together, especially in the suffering parts of life. As a man I am ashamed of our male history in this regard. Thank G-d it seems to be diminishing these day, or at least over the past fifty years or so.

Go to the NT Apocrypha section of this most excellent website that you're on and that we exercise our brains upon, and read through The Gospel of Thomas from beginning to end. Keep in mind while you're reading it that many qualified scholars have determined that this Gospel probably predates much of the synoptic content, except maybe for parts of Mark, and also contains information in parallel with the Q source since some of the concepts are similar to those that ended up in the cannon. Pay particular attention to saying 22, which also captioned the depiction. Also pay close attention to the final saying of the Gospel that was not added later.

We're all going through huge genetic and societal transformations as we speak, and IMHO this Gospel mystically predicted much of it two millenia ago. I, for one, have striven for twenty years to find the "correct" interpretations of this excluded Gospel, for the first saying tells us that those who do so will not taste death, and this infers that such people will find the kingdom. Since this was the central concept in Jesus' teachings about the mysteries, I believe that it's worth the attempt, and in the context of the entire Gospel I for one do not find the image "disturbing".

While you're in the Apocrypha section, also read The Secret Gospel of Mark, which you'll notice was translated by Morton Smith, and who also wrote the excellent book, Jesus the Magician, which I recommended elsewhere here.

If we all continue to exclude such information from our knowledge base concerning this man that we revere so, and who may have represented divinity, I believe that as believeing Christians we're severely damaging our chances at redemptiion in the future.

flow....

 

[InLove]

Hi--

Since we have been talking a great deal about pictures of Jesus, I wanted to post a picture of a sketch I have always thought was pretty good--and maybe even fairly accurate in an historical sense. But I cannot post it properly because of copyright.

There are lots of pictures here, and some are pretty interesting, but I just have always liked the black and white sketch of Jesus helping a toddler to walk.

So, here's the link, if anyone wants to take a look.

http://www.picturesofjesus4you.com/jesus_drawings.html

I hope there is nothing to offend here, but I guess there could be.

InPeace,
InLove

 

[Quahom1]

Hi--

Since we have been talking a great deal about pictures of Jesus, I wanted to post a picture of a sketch I have always thought was pretty good--and maybe even fairly accurate in an historical sense. But I cannot post it properly because of copyright.

There are lots of pictures here, and some are pretty interesting, but I just have always liked the black and white sketch of Jesus helping a toddler to walk.

So, here's the link, if anyone wants to take a look.

http://www.picturesofjesus4you.com/jesus_drawings.html

I hope there is nothing to offend here, but I guess there could be.

InPeace,
InLove

Ditto...

here is one that rings a bell with me...

http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/sallman/christ-our-pilot.htm

 

[cavalier]

Q, your arguments seem a little inconsistent

Quote: Yo Eleven11

Again a bloody woman, (naked or not) is not erotic. IMHO
The 1st thing that caught my eye was the blood.
Then I saw the cross and the thorns and the verse and so on....

Not to you. But then again you did not create the picture.

but then,

What is incorporated in the picture is designed to cause the viewer to imagine sadism/masochism, violence, death, and eroticism. There is no message of sacrifice or salvation in the picture.

Time and again you tell us exactly what the picture is trying to do, yet when someone else offers their opinion on the picture, you tell them that they did not create it. I can only assume it was you who created the picture.

The picture defeats the message below it, by causing a very male reaction to a female image....
In short, it attempts to illicit excitment at the sight of a subdued female who is physically attractive and healthy.

As YO asked, what of depictions of a semi-naked man as Christ, does that elicit excitment in women? Your answer that most women do not want a man to be subdued is absurd. The notion that we can clearly define who women are and what they want is just old-fashioned male chauvinism.

Also, in a later post you quoted YO as saying,

Just as some people may find it obsene for Jesus to be depicted as a "White Male" (european) hanging on the cross.

and replied that, "He is depicted as people can understand "Him"."
For some an image of a female Jesus might help them to understand. Should they be denied this understanding simply because such an image might float Q's boat?

To sensationalise an event like the crucifiction, with a naked female body suggests that man (men) is lower than the basest animals in this world. Even the animal kingdom instinctively protects, (not destroys), its female half, and it certainly does not put that destruction on display, and call it "art".

I haven't known animals give art shows of any kind. Seriously though, people always come out with these statements about the animal kingdom and often they're just absurd. There are species of animals where the females are twice as big as the males, there are matriarchal societies, and if you want to talk about protection then surely you have to look towards mothers.
The males seem to go around for the most part thinking only of their dicks. Ah, now tell me again Q, why was it that you didn't like that picture?

 

[taijasi]

InLove, thanks for posting that link. And Q, too. InLove, I resonate most with the next to the bottom image, righthand side (#454). It reminds me a great deal of my own favorite, here. Maybe blended with this one.

Another image that evokes a powerful, and heartfelt response for me, is the 1961 Harry Anderson painting (`Prince of Peace'), depicting Jesus knocking at the U.N. Building. I prefer to believe that, relative to our own spiritual stature, Jesus - and/or `G-d' - is a being of these (and greater) dimensions. Perhaps quite literally, though also, the "still, small voice" ...

(it doesn't leave much squirming room in between - and that's what I like about it! )

Namaskar,

andrew/taijasi

 

[taijasi]

By the way, here is a story, from the Buddhist tradition, which also teaches us something about how to look for God ... and why many of us do not recognize Her, among us.

If it shocks your sensibilities, then good. The imagery will be in your own head - not evoked by an actual picture.

And if you find it difficult to accept, or contemplate literally, then perhaps now we know where a good challenge - and opportunity - awaits.

The story is about Arya Asanga (Aryasanga), and his encounter with Maitreya Buddha - including a visit to Tushita Heaven. The version here is from Sogyal Rinpoche's Tibetan Book of Living and Dying.

May it help us all, to recognize the God in all.

Love and Light,

andrew

 

[Quahom1]

Q, your arguments seem a little inconsistent

but then,
Time and again you tell us exactly what the picture is trying to do, yet when someone else offers their opinion on the picture, you tell them that they did not create it. I can only assume it was you who created the picture.

I said that Yo did not create the picture. He understood that I was not pointing a finger at "Him". I also gave "My" reasons as to why it was disturbing to me. That is all.

As YO asked, what of depictions of a semi-naked man as Christ, does that elicit excitment in women? Your answer that most women do not want a man to be subdued is absurd. The notion that we can clearly define who women are and what they want is just old-fashioned male chauvinism.

Perhaps, but then, I know what the women in my life have and have not wanted, so I go by past experience. Nor have I ever implied that I was other than "old fashioned". I believe that speaks for itself...

and replied that, "He is depicted as people can understand "Him"."
For some an image of a female Jesus might help them to understand. Should they be denied this understanding simply because such an image might float Q's boat?

Again, I stated that the picture was disturbing, to me. I didn't tell anyone else what they could or could not think.

I haven't known animals give art shows of any kind. Seriously though, people always come out with these statements about the animal kingdom and often they're just absurd. There are species of animals where the females are twice as big as the males, there are matriarchal societies, and if you want to talk about protection then surely you have to look towards mothers.
The males seem to go around for the most part thinking only of their dicks. Ah, now tell me again Q, why was it that you didn't like that picture?

That is your opinion of things. And the only area where females might be bigger than males is usually with arthropods, not much else. However sir, your generalising inference about males using other than their brains for thinking is uncalled for. In fact it is plain out rude.

In any event I said I found the picture, disturbing. And my argument is anything but inconsistent.

v/r

Q

 

[Quahom1]

InLove, thanks for posting that link. And Q, too. InLove, I resonate most with the next to the bottom image, righthand side (#454). It reminds me a great deal of my own favorite, here. Maybe blended with this one.

Another image that evokes a powerful, and heartfelt response for me, is the 1961 Harry Anderson painting (`Prince of Peace'), depicting Jesus knocking at the U.N. Building. I prefer to believe that, relative to our own spiritual stature, Jesus - and/or `G-d' - is a being of these (and greater) dimensions. Perhaps quite literally, though also, the "still, small voice" ...

(it doesn't leave much squirming room in between - and that's what I like about it! )

Namaskar,

andrew/taijasi

View attachment 280

Agreed, that is a powerful message.

 

[Quahom1]

By the way, here is a story, from the Buddhist tradition, which also teaches us something about how to look for God ... and why many of us do not recognize Her, among us.

If it shocks your sensibilities, then good. The imagery will be in your own head - not evoked by an actual picture.

And if you find it difficult to accept, or contemplate literally, then perhaps now we know where a good challenge - and opportunity - awaits.

The story is about Arya Asanga (Aryasanga), and his encounter with Maitreya Buddha - including a visit to Tushita Heaven. The version here is from Sogyal Rinpoche's Tibetan Book of Living and Dying.

May it help us all, to recognize the God in all.

Love and Light,

andrew

Well, at least "She" wasn't nailed naked to a cross, and called enlightening art...

 

[InLove]

This thread is really interesting to me. I am enjoying reading the different responses to the artwork. Q, that sailor has got it going on, doesn't he? Where did you first see that picture?

taijasi, I really, really enjoyed the sketches of the Masters.

When I look at a work of art, I have learned that if it initially sets off my alarm, then I gotta find out why. So even if it disturbs me--especially if it does, I have to study it some more. And sometimes, I look at something and think, "Oh, man, another boring, common, uninteresting thing." But that reaction from me also disturbs me, because someone thought it worth doing. So I think on that, too, and often I find something I did not see before. I try not to approach art as a "like' or "dislike" issue. (By the way, flow, I am reading Thomas--and I did not mean to interrupt your chain of thought there.)

The Endowment for The Arts is often in the headlines over what should and should not be supported by taxpayers. This is, in my opinion, simply because art will often disturb.

I'd like to make a correction about something I wrote earlier in the thread. I equated the ancient Hebrew symbolism with the Mayans. That is wrong. The Mayans actually did depict God in artwork that resembled dragons and such. When I said what I said, I was thinking of the spirals that more than one of the ancient American societies employed, particularly the Anaztasis. Sorry about that.

Well, I still haven't read everything here in this thread, so back I go!

InPeace,
InLove

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

[URL="http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:J2ylWhM4Sk3YQM:http://www.itsablackthang.com/images/Art-Religious/A-Gift-From-God-by-Mathews.jpg"]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:J2ylWhM4Sk3YQM:http://www.itsablackthang.com/images/Art-Religious/A-Gift-From-God-by-Mathews.jpg[/URL]

[URL="http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:fAL7MYlUj3SCEM:http://www.wits.ac.za/holistic/nut.gif"]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:fAL7MYlUj3SCEM:http://www.wits.ac.za/holistic/nut.gif[/URL]

[URL="http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:-tXBiRHxPj4XkM:http://www.yellowratbastard.com/images/thumb/yrblu9210.jpg"]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:-tXBiRHxPj4XkM:http://www.yellowratbastard.com/images/thumb/yrblu9210.jpg[/URL]

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:NsUGezRZZFBjtM:http://p1.xanga.com/1a/d0/1ad02678a411d3747a77dfb15e9d013c12922068.jpg

ANY THOUGHTS?

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

Maybe better to leave depictions be...

True, or make the "depiction" business open to "all" .
or "none" at all

 

[InLove]

Re: Post#96:

YO, I had to put all the images into "My Pictures" and zoom in to view them, so some of the details are fuzzy from distortion. But the first one is awesome. I mean, just awesome...(I am about to be welcoming my fifth grandchild soon, so I may be a little sentimental about the whole thing.) And, as it turned out, it was kinda cool that I could only see the tiny jpeg or whatever it is at first, because zooming in added another dimension to the whole experience.

I am still working on the second one. Looks Egyptian?

I cannot read the writing on the third one, but I see the symbols, and I feel hope. 'Course, I'd better wait for the "caption" to fully understand the meaning.

Is #4 an embryo? Like I said, can't see it too well....

InPeace,
InLove

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

Re: Post#96:

YO, I had to put all the images into "My Pictures" and zoom in to view them, so some of the details are fuzzy from distortion. But the first one is awesome. I mean, just awesome...(I am about to be welcoming my fifth grandchild soon, so I may be a little sentimental about the whole thing.) And, as it turned out, it was kinda cool that I could only see the tiny jpeg or whatever it is at first, because zooming in added another dimension to the whole experience.

I am still working on the second one. Looks Egyptian?

I cannot read the writing on the third one, but I see the symbols, and I feel hope. 'Course, I'd better wait for the "caption" to fully understand the meaning.

Is #4 an embryo? Like I said, can't see it too well....

InPeace,
InLove

Actually inlove,

One of the pictures is of 2 people holding a small baby together.
I kinda like that myself.

The Egyptian lookin one is has a caption of "Discovering GOD" as part of the web site.

The one with the symbols has a caption of
"Love one God " and is a T-shirt. I think I will be ordering that one real soon.



Which makes me wonder.

What does GOD see when GOD looks at us?

any thoughts on that?

 

[InLove]

Actually inlove,

One of the pictures is of 2 people holding a small baby together.
I kinda like that myself.

The Egyptian lookin one is has a caption of "Discovering GOD" as part of the web site.

The one with the symbols has a caption of
"Love one God " and is a T-shirt. I think I will be ordering that one real soon.

Oh, yeah--I had no doubt what the first one was. I only wish I could see it in person so I could pick up on what looks like intricate detail. And I thought the second one looked familiar. I am glad to know what the writing was on the third. What about #4. Embryo?

And I forgot to comment on the movie poster. Is it indeed a promotional for a film? Or is it something else? Guess I could google it...just busy cleaning out a closet today.

What does GOD see when GOD looks at us?

I think GOD sees us as we have been and as what we will be and as what we are.

InPeace,
InLove