If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Stuff.co.nz)   Gallery invites visitors to deface sacred text. The muslim world shocked, plans demonst . . . wait, it was a bible? Nevermind   (stuff.co.nz) divider line 299
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

10206 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jul 2009 at 10:25 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-07-23 10:46:44 AM
gshepnyc: As much as I am an anti-theist who opposes any religious incursion into policy making and the lives of non-believers, I think this sort of thing is tacky at least.
Even atheists have a sense of desecration. That is, a thing needn't be dependent on any supernatural being in order to be cherished by people.

The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard. At best it is fortune-cookie quality and at worst it exhorts us to bring out what is worst in human nature. By all rights people should begin to see that and depart from it entirely. But to deface something people feel they need is cruel.


I agree with your point, even though I am no athiest. What if we were to do this with copies of the US Constitution or the Declaration of Independence? There would certainly be people, myself included, who would be offended by the desecration of these documents. Interestingly enough, as much as I would despise a person for doing so, I also believe strongly enough in those documents that I would protect your right to express yourself, but that's an entirely different topic.
 
2009-07-23 10:47:12 AM
gshepnyc: The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard. At best it is fortune-cookie quality and at worst it exhorts us to bring out what is worst in human nature.

Really? Ever read Song of Solomon? Pretty good stuff, man.

What do you consider "good" literature? What reasonable standards do you use?
 
2009-07-23 10:47:46 AM
EviLincoln: I'd change the ending to make the good guys win.

I laughed
 
2009-07-23 10:49:05 AM
The difference in this case is:

The Bible: The people who read and respect it would pray for forgiveness for the people who defaced it.

The Koran: The people who read and respect it would kill you....
 
2009-07-23 10:50:01 AM
powerman2424: The difference in this case is:

The Bible: The people who read and respect it would pray for forgiveness for the people who defaced it.

The Koran: The people who read and respect it would kill you....


Well, I guess that makes you a wonderful person, doesn't it?
 
2009-07-23 10:50:12 AM
rodeofrog: gshepnyc: The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard.

So literature that has captured the imagination of billions around the world for hundreds of years is bad by any reasonable standard?


See also Dan Brown.

Yes, as literature, the bible stinks. It's 2 dimensional, it contradicts itself, it's padded with needless and meaningless blather and passages that hold no importance outside the tribal societies that first wrote it down.

There are a lot of things that people like that are not really good. Part of being an adult is learning that. It's called discernment and taste.

Also, out of the total global population there are bound to be "billions of people" whose imaginations are rather easily captured by the flimsiest things. Most people prefer assertions to ideas.
 
2009-07-23 10:51:55 AM
The Gospel According to Doughnuts:

I don't care who you fark.
I don't care what you eat.
I don't care what you wear.
I don't care what you do with your hair or beard.
I'm not even asking you to to love your neighbor, just stop acting like assholes towards one another.

And clean up after yourselves, this place is a mess.


A-frickin-men
 
2009-07-23 10:54:51 AM
This is very offensive, tasteless, and disgusting. No, I don't have a snarky comment after that to change the meaning.
 
2009-07-23 10:56:04 AM
It would be indeed a great thing if Christians everywhere could rise up and "take action" against this sort of thing the way we allow some of other bearded brethren to do. The outcomes of these uprisings would indeed be very interesting indeed.

/you may now call me a racist
//and assume that I'm white
///and thereby expose yourselves as racist, too
 
2009-07-23 10:56:22 AM
I fail to see how gallery visitors could make that sacred text any more offensive than it already is.
 
2009-07-23 10:58:03 AM
lh5.ggpht.com
 
2009-07-23 10:58:11 AM
fuzzwell: The definition of what is considered art is so broad, that a toilet with piss on it is called art.

You just don't get it man. The toilet symbolizes the regular man and being pissed on is how he feels every day of his life. It's compelling.
 
2009-07-23 10:58:29 AM
But..B-ut...b-b-but would Obama call it "stupid?

o O
---
 
2009-07-23 10:58:36 AM
I imagine if a bunch of Christians were doing this to a Richard Dawkins book, Fark would call them crazy, religious nutjobs etc. yet when its the Christians being targeted, everything is cool. Interesting.
 
2009-07-23 10:58:48 AM
Why would muslims care about a bible?
 
2009-07-23 10:59:12 AM
DslainteC: Read the damn book before you claim to be offended!

This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy. This guy begat that guy. That guy begat the other guy. The other guy begat this guy.

Awful lot of screwing going on in that one book. And all just to supposedly trace the lineage of Jesus, who was supposedly begat by God cutting in line, making the whole lineage issue moot.

I've read it from cover to cover. Revelations is the only book in it that's worth a damn.

1) What was Satan doing in "Paradise"?

2) Every last animal on Earth was within walking distance of Noah's house.

3) The laws of diffraction (and therefore vision) were different before the Great Flood.

4) Jesus rose from the dead, but had to leave for some reason?

5) God "clothes the flowers of the field" and all the animals, yet he always needs money.

6) You're supposed to pray to God, but what for? You can't possibly hope to change his mind about something without insulting his "infallibility."

7) Jesus claimed to be "The way, The Truth and The light." Yet, he finds it necessary to hide himself from us. Isn't hiding "the truth" called "lying"?

8) If you go to Heaven, and the pets you love just cease to be, how can it be "Heaven"? Won't your memories of them have to be erased for you to achieve the state of Nirvana that's supposed to come with Heaven?

That last one sort of implies that perfect faith requires perfect ignorance.
 
2009-07-23 10:59:20 AM
were I annotating I would cede to another's words:

"jesus died for some somebody's sins but not mine- mine are my own"-patti smith

the work of art is an interesting piece of epistemology. How do you know the text is sacred? not because of induction, deduction, phenomenal observation, logic, reason etc- the reason the text is sacred is because of revelatory knowledge. how do you get the revelatory knowledge: from the book that says it is sacred, or from clergy that have read the book and repeat to you that the book says it is sacred. things get awfully circular from an epistemological point of view...

Let me give it a try:

an lo, did the tens of thousands of angelic electrons did bring to the ken of the multitudes these words: let all who read this know that this post is the true Word of Him from beginning to end, from alpha to omega, and shall be recognized in those of the faith to be just and divine from hence forth. oh, and shellfish and bacon are totally cool- just make sure to cook both well, and don't eat the clams, or mussels that stay closed in the boiling water...for they are dead and full of bacteria...so sayeth He.

there we go...divine scripture...says so right in the body text
 
2009-07-23 10:59:35 AM
Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Heh, modern artists. They are getting the outrage and attention they crave by offending Christians, yet none of the death threats and scary shiat that Muslims would bring down on their heads if they used the Koran instead.

I concur. Defacing Christian stuff is sort of an easy target for both publicity and gravitas as a big bad free thinkin' iconoclast. It is also pretty safe. American Christians are pretty used to it by now (hypocritical religious people are so stock in film/tv/whatever that nobody even notices them anymore), and very seldom violent.

For some REAL street cred, I would suggest replicating some of the more crass defilings of Christian symbols with Muslim symbols. It would demonstrate both the fearlessness of artists, the refusal of the artist to be intimidated by religious fundamentalists, provide a tableau to show the equivalence of Christian fundy-ism and Muslim fundy-ism and provide ideological space in which to discuss important matters of the day.
 
2009-07-23 10:59:38 AM
gshepnyc: rodeofrog: gshepnyc: The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard.

So literature that has captured the imagination of billions around the world for hundreds of years is bad by any reasonable standard?

See also Dan Brown.

Yes, as literature, the bible stinks. It's 2 dimensional, it contradicts itself, it's padded with needless and meaningless blather and passages that hold no importance outside the tribal societies that first wrote it down.

There are a lot of things that people like that are not really good. Part of being an adult is learning that. It's called discernment and taste.

Also, out of the total global population there are bound to be "billions of people" whose imaginations are rather easily captured by the flimsiest things. Most people prefer assertions to ideas.


Dan Brown will not stand the test of time. On that you can rely.

The Bible is a pretty good read. The meaningless passages place the stories into context - as do one might expect an epic to do. The contradictions express the evolution of doctrine and the difficulty of moral absolutes. As fr being 2 dimensional, I flatly disagree. There are layers of meaning in the bible that have inspired countless poets. I mean, the story of Joseph is filled with beautiful imagery about betrayal and forgiveness.

Discernment and taste are wonderful things. I suggest you have allowed your fear of religion to cloud your own taste.
 
2009-07-23 10:59:45 AM
This is only acceptable if its on a Bible. Everything else is protected, especially anything by Al Gore.
 
2009-07-23 11:00:40 AM
eudemonist: gshepnyc: The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard. At best it is fortune-cookie quality and at worst it exhorts us to bring out what is worst in human nature.

Really? Ever read Song of Solomon? Pretty good stuff, man.

What do you consider "good" literature? What reasonable standards do you use?


You are right in that Song of Solomon is the closest the bible gets to being good literature. I would even go so far as to say that the later imposed interpretations that connect the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden with the wood on which Christ is crucified as being pretty tasty in it's poetry. But neither rise to the level of Dante, Shakespeare, Hugo...

But I don't think the destruction of the texts of either of those stories is what people are upset about. They are angry about any challenge to the assertions of divine origin.
 
2009-07-23 11:02:23 AM
rodeofrog: gshepnyc: rodeofrog: gshepnyc: The bible is a hodge-podge of stuff that would be bad literature by any reasonable standard.

So literature that has captured the imagination of billions around the world for hundreds of years is bad by any reasonable standard?

See also Dan Brown.

Yes, as literature, the bible stinks. It's 2 dimensional, it contradicts itself, it's padded with needless and meaningless blather and passages that hold no importance outside the tribal societies that first wrote it down.

There are a lot of things that people like that are not really good. Part of being an adult is learning that. It's called discernment and taste.

Also, out of the total global population there are bound to be "billions of people" whose imaginations are rather easily captured by the flimsiest things. Most people prefer assertions to ideas.

Dan Brown will not stand the test of time. On that you can rely.

The Bible is a pretty good read. The meaningless passages place the stories into context - as do one might expect an epic to do. The contradictions express the evolution of doctrine and the difficulty of moral absolutes. As fr being 2 dimensional, I flatly disagree. There are layers of meaning in the bible that have inspired countless poets. I mean, the story of Joseph is filled with beautiful imagery about betrayal and forgiveness.

Discernment and taste are wonderful things. I suggest you have allowed your fear of religion to cloud your own taste.


The only fear is that so many people use it as an excuse to inflict evil on so many other people. Otherwise it's more of a distaste than a fear.
 
2009-07-23 11:02:57 AM
treesloth: Artist: Ooh, let's take something regarded as sacred and denigrate it! That'll piss them off!

That wasn't the artist's intention. RTFA.
 
2009-07-23 11:06:03 AM
treesloth: Jesus was a wyld stallyn? Most excellent. Seriously, the Bill and Ted's soundtrack is one of my favorite albums ever. I can't quite figure out why, but I love it. This is coming from the guy that thinks that Rachmaninoff did some of the best workout tunes ever.

After all, God did give Rock-and-Roll to you. He gave Rock-and-Roll to everyone.

/STATIONNNNNNN!
//The 2nd movie had good music too!
 
2009-07-23 11:06:35 AM
While it's obviously petty and rude to be scrawling obscenities in a bible put on public display, is it really something that should be used as the religious equivalent of a HS yearbook to begin with?

Think about what you're inviting in, there.
 
2009-07-23 11:07:02 AM
HK_shooter: treesloth: Jesus was a wyld stallyn? Most excellent. Seriously, the Bill and Ted's soundtrack is one of my favorite albums ever. I can't quite figure out why, but I love it. This is coming from the guy that thinks that Rachmaninoff did some of the best workout tunes ever.

After all, God did give Rock-and-Roll to you. He gave Rock-and-Roll to everyone.

/STATIONNNNNNN!
//The 2nd movie had good music too!


Excellent martian butt. Primus should have won the battle of the bands.
 
2009-07-23 11:07:20 AM
EviLincoln: I'd change the ending to make the good guys win.

Yeah no kidding. Seeing as history is written by the victor, you kind of have to wonder if Satan wasn't the good guy after all. I mean basically you have this non-elected king saying you will do exactly as I say or be banned for eternity to hell. Then here you have one of the class of Angels that were created to be slaves to this king rising up against him and saying no, I will not be a slave to your will. Better to be free in hell than a slave to you in heaven. And then he tries to tell men this. He "tempts" Adam and Eve by telling them they to are free to decide what to do for themselves, they don't have to be slaves to god's will. Really, if you take the names God and Satan out of the story, which one would you really call the villain and which the hero?
 
2009-07-23 11:08:41 AM
Studson: I imagine if a bunch of Christians were doing this to a Richard Dawkins book, Fark would call them crazy, religious nutjobs etc. yet when its the Christians being targeted, everything is cool. Interesting.

get comfortable with this. the pendulum has swung entirely in the opposite direction. And it's still going. I guess it's time for our very own LA Riots or some such nonsense to get attention to the problem.
 
2009-07-23 11:09:36 AM
Studson: I imagine if a bunch of Christians were doing this to a Richard Dawkins book, Fark would call them crazy, religious nutjobs etc. yet when its the Christians being targeted, everything is cool. Interesting.

I imagine that as long as you bought the book, atheists could care less what you did with it. I can also imagine that few Christians would bother to read it first to see what it really said.
 
2009-07-23 11:09:44 AM
Kome: McFifenstein: wait... I wonder if Jesus could write.

He had a hell of a time holding his pen, I bet.


For all that's been said about him, you never hear anything about him putting down his words of wit on paper. Everything about him is second hand info, what other people have said about him, nothing that he said himself, which suggest that he never existed.
 
2009-07-23 11:11:26 AM
Obviously to big of a pussy to put a Koran out to be defaced. I guess he didn't want to be part of a Muslim infomercial getting his head sawed off to show why you shouldn't do it.
 
2009-07-23 11:11:58 AM
fuzzwell: The definition of what is considered art is so broad, that a toilet with piss on it is called art.

My toddlers are frickin' prodigies because they piss all over the toilet.
 
2009-07-23 11:12:03 AM
fireclown: Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Heh, modern artists. They are getting the outrage and attention they crave by offending Christians, yet none of the death threats and scary shiat that Muslims would bring down on their heads if they used the Koran instead.

I concur. Defacing Christian stuff is sort of an easy target for both publicity and gravitas as a big bad free thinkin' iconoclast. It is also pretty safe. American Christians are pretty used to it by now (hypocritical religious people are so stock in film/tv/whatever that nobody even notices them anymore), and very seldom violent.

For some REAL street cred, I would suggest replicating some of the more crass defilings of Christian symbols with Muslim symbols. It would demonstrate both the fearlessness of artists, the refusal of the artist to be intimidated by religious fundamentalists, provide a tableau to show the equivalence of Christian fundy-ism and Muslim fundy-ism and provide ideological space in which to discuss important matters of the day.


Yeah, American Muslims are so skeery and veeolunt. Durr.
 
2009-07-23 11:12:16 AM
rodeofrog: The Bible is a pretty good read. The meaningless passages place the stories into context - as do one might expect an epic to do. The contradictions express the evolution of doctrine and the difficulty of moral absolutes. As fr being 2 dimensional, I flatly disagree. There are layers of meaning in the bible that have inspired countless poets. I mean, the story of Joseph is filled with beautiful imagery about betrayal and forgiveness.

if one agrees with the assertion that the Bible is literature, it loses its credibility as doctrine. One will hold it no more sacred than "Gone with the Wind" or "Horton Hears a Hoo".

if one agrees with the assertion that the doctrine evolved over time, the assertion is incompatible with the literalism that fundamentalist types place on the text. This is the textual analog to the creationism-evolution "debate": The Word as revealed and taken As-Is versus the Old-New Testament "progression". "Change over time" in terms of textuality places it in the social-constructionist camp, which is more about humans than God.
 
2009-07-23 11:12:24 AM
Latinwolf: Kome: McFifenstein: wait... I wonder if Jesus could write.

He had a hell of a time holding his pen, I bet.

For all that's been said about him, you never hear anything about him putting down his words of wit on paper. Everything about him is second hand info, what other people have said about him, nothing that he said himself, which suggest that he never existed.


so any historical figure who used a scribe never existed? Don't get me wrong, I doubt Jesus existed, but I don't think you know a lot about history.
 
2009-07-23 11:13:53 AM
Hey subby, was the bible being defaced in a muslim country that's also currently managing an occupation the United States? 'Cuz I bet that would make you feel a little less snooty.
 
2009-07-23 11:13:55 AM
give me doughnuts: The Gospel According to Doughnuts:

I don't care who you fark.
I don't care what you eat.
I don't care what you wear.
I don't care what you do with your hair or beard.
I'm not even asking you to to love your neighbor, just stop acting like assholes towards one another.

And clean up after yourselves, this place is a mess.

A-frickin-men


So far I like what you are telling me. What is the catch? Please don't tell me I have to cut my balls off to catch a spaceship.
 
2009-07-23 11:15:45 AM
gshepnyc: The only fear is that so many people use it as an excuse to inflict evil on so many other people. Otherwise it's more of a distaste than a fear.

I've noticed a common theme with you anti-religious farkers. You over generalize Christians making them all accountable for any and all sins committed under the pretext of Christianity. By placing all Christians in this box you feel free to persecute and hate the entire population. We are no longer a majority, we are a minority. I'm not discounting things done under the pretext of religion, but lets be honest, throughout history every group regardless of what they believe has been responsible for some horrible crimes against humanity. The fact is, people are imperfect.
 
2009-07-23 11:16:38 AM
Hey, the book itself is merely an object.

It is the historical, cultural and religious meaning of the information within the book that matters and that remains inviolate.

Anyone who would actually take the time and effort to deface a Bible and to do so in a public way is not harming the Word, but showing who THEY are and that, I suspect, was the intention of the exhibit. It is a testament to the West and to Christians that despite the disrespect for our faith shown by the exhibitors of this project we are a tad more enlightened than our Islamic brethren. They could deface a Bible instead of a Koran because Christians in the West are forgiving, kind and tolerant. No one was going to destroy the gallery with explosives or shoot the exhibitors with a high powered rifle.
 
2009-07-23 11:17:23 AM
Bartleby the Scrivener: rodeofrog: The Bible is a pretty good read. The meaningless passages place the stories into context - as do one might expect an epic to do. The contradictions express the evolution of doctrine and the difficulty of moral absolutes. As fr being 2 dimensional, I flatly disagree. There are layers of meaning in the bible that have inspired countless poets. I mean, the story of Joseph is filled with beautiful imagery about betrayal and forgiveness.

if one agrees with the assertion that the Bible is literature, it loses its credibility as doctrine. One will hold it no more sacred than "Gone with the Wind" or "Horton Hears a Hoo".

if one agrees with the assertion that the doctrine evolved over time, the assertion is incompatible with the literalism that fundamentalist types place on the text. This is the textual analog to the creationism-evolution "debate": The Word as revealed and taken As-Is versus the Old-New Testament "progression". "Change over time" in terms of textuality places it in the social-constructionist camp, which is more about humans than God.


I really don't know what your point is. I argued that the Bible is epic literature. Epic literature, among other things, provides moral guidance for a group of people- aka "doctrine".

Literalists are easily confused by symbolism of all kinds. So what?
 
2009-07-23 11:18:18 AM
I played in a gallery in NYC a few years ago that had pages of the Koran, Bible, Torah, and other religious scripts all over the floor and walls. It was a rather inclusive natural defacement....
 
2009-07-23 11:18:31 AM
Small Hands Make It Look Bigger: By placing all Christians in this box you feel free to persecute and hate the entire population. We are no longer a majority, we are a minority.

farm2.static.flickr.com
 
2009-07-23 11:20:03 AM
vertiaset: despite the disrespect for our faith shown by the exhibitors

Dude, did you even read the article?

FTFA: The Metropolitan Community Church originally proposed the exhibition as a way of reclaiming the Bible as a sacred text.
 
2009-07-23 11:20:28 AM
fuzzwell:
It's not that difficult to make a big version of the Bible and let people write on it and call it art. That doesn't make it art, that makes it a billboard for religious hatred to be publicized. The definition of what is considered art is so broad, that a toilet with piss on it is called art.


On the other hand, many people are so close-minded that they find it incomprehensible that people don't share at least the majority of their most preciously held beliefs. Thus, without realizing it, they selfishly force their beliefs on others through laws, social expectations, and even casual expressions - specific words that indicate their intolerance.

I'm sure I don't have to point out examples.

It would be wrong to assume that all of these folks are just Bad People(tm). Some will actually consider a message given to them, to alert them to the fact that their ideas may not be universal, and indeed, may be wrong. Desecrating this idol made of their beliefs is undoubtedly a crass thing to do, but for those with deeply seated, unquestioned beliefs, the message has to be shocking for them to acknowledge it. Sometimes, you have to shout to be heard.

So while this may not be art as something to be viewed and appreciated for pure visual aesthetics, it can be seen as something that attempts to advance the social state of humanity; this falls well into the realm of art.

fuzzwell: Personally, I think that defacing any religious book is wrong, and that people are entitled to their beliefs without interference from me.

Aren't those two thoughts separate? How does defacing a book some group finds holy equate to interference? Do Jewish people get mad when I eat bacon? Are Christians unable to practice their faith because I don't take weekly communion? These actions seem to be affecting me only. To call it interference indicates that I should already be subjugated by their beliefs.

It may be rude, but it's not interfering.
 
2009-07-23 11:21:17 AM
fireclown: For some REAL street cred, I would suggest replicating some of the more crass defilings of Christian symbols with Muslim symbols. It would demonstrate both the fearlessness of artists, the refusal of the artist to be intimidated by religious fundamentalists, provide a tableau to show the equivalence of Christian fundy-ism and Muslim fundy-ism and provide ideological space in which to discuss important matters of the day.

That wouldn't work and here's why: Western artists who do this kind of thing with Christian symbology (Andres Serrano, Robert Mapplethorpe) are doing it as people raised Christian themselves. It is intended as a critique or examination of their own culture and society.

Doing the same thing with the iconography of Islam, which they are not part of and rarely have any direct experience or understanding of, would be nothing but cultural chauvinism. There is a significant difference.
 
2009-07-23 11:21:24 AM
SteelPeart: Studson: I imagine if a bunch of Christians were doing this to a Richard Dawkins book, Fark would call them crazy, religious nutjobs etc. yet when its the Christians being targeted, everything is cool. Interesting.

get comfortable with this. the pendulum has swung entirely in the opposite direction. And it's still going. I guess it's time for our very own LA Riots or some such nonsense to get attention to the problem.


I whole heartedly agree with you about the pendulum. Truth be told, I don't mind it entirely simply because I knew we would be persecuted, I expect to be persecuted etc. My big issue is the blatant double standards and hypocrisy.
 
2009-07-23 11:22:33 AM
rodeofrog:
I really don't know what your point is. I argued that the Bible is epic literature. Epic literature, among other things, provides moral guidance for a group of people- aka "doctrine".

Literalists are easily confused by symbolism of all kinds. So what?


not all responses are arguments.
 
2009-07-23 11:22:42 AM
CrankMyBlueSax: Small Hands Make It Look Bigger: By placing all Christians in this box you feel free to persecute and hate the entire population. We are no longer a majority, we are a minority.

Yeah that chart looks scientific and unbiased. You have me convinced...
 
2009-07-23 11:23:01 AM
I consider the bible fair game for this sort of thing, over and above the Torah or the Qu'ran,, based purely on how the phsyical object is treated by followers of the respective religions.

The Torah is meticulously hand-copied, it being a breach of custom to change its form in any way. It is not touched with the bare hands.

The Qu'ran also has special rules about how it is to be looked after, including storing it on a high shelf, covering it with a cloth, and others.

The Bible? Just a mass-produced book, millions of 'em out there, with no particular rules about how to respect it. It has been edited and/or translated countless times, and no special consideration is given to the physical object, only the content within.

So, if Christians have no particular reason to look after the physical object, why should anyone else? Wheras a Muslim, for example, does have specific rules about how a Koran should be treated, and is thus entitled to be upset when somebody deliberately breaks those rules.
 
2009-07-23 11:24:57 AM
God is Love.. A lot of haters here
 
Displayed 50 of 299 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report