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  
•       •       •

10204 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 11:25:56 AM
Bartleby the Scrivener: 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.


Um okay. I guess I agree that many people have a hard time understanding that doctrine may be expressed as a constant eternal truth, yet still evolve as society evolves?
 
2009-07-23 11:26:04 AM
Mayhem_2006: 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.



Your attempt at reasoning just killed countless brain cells....
 
2009-07-23 11:26:45 AM
Studson: 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...


Perhaps I misunderstood you. Do you seriously believe that Christians represent a minority? There are places where that is true. Maybe that is what you were referring to.
 
2009-07-23 11:29:12 AM
Mayhem_2006: I consider the bible fair game for this sort of thing, over and above the Torah or the Qu'ran...
The Torah is meticulously hand-copied...
The Qu'ran also has special rules about how it is to be looked after...


If I own a Torah or Qu'ran or Bible I can do whatever the FARK I want to with it. I can eat it, I can scribble in it, I can make it into a hat/brooch/pterodactyl. It's my own goddamn property. It doesn't matter what traditions are applied to it.

Yes, taking a holy book and burning it in front of a Temple/Church/Mosque might be wrong, as it could be an act of intimidation, but that's a separate issue.
 
2009-07-23 11:29:15 AM
Alabama Hot Pocket: 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.

All should be put out Koran, Bible, shiat on them all.
 
2009-07-23 11:29:18 AM
CrankMyBlueSax: Studson: 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...

Perhaps I misunderstood you. Do you seriously believe that Christians represent a minority? There are places where that is true. Maybe that is what you were referring to.


Huh?? I think you have the wrong person, I was just commenting on your chart, I think you want to address Small Hands Make It Look Bigger

But my own personal beliefs, I'd say that we are a minority. You may live in a region where that is not the case, but out of the entire population we def are. There are far more muslims than any religion.
 
2009-07-23 11:29:22 AM
StaleCoffee: American Muslims

WTF do American Muslims have to do with anything? I know this may sound incredible, but there are other groups of Muslims out there who aren't American and who don't take kindly (death threats, beheadings, bombings) to those they disagree with or those who would deface the Koran.
 
2009-07-23 11:30:30 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.


please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...
 
2009-07-23 11:34:32 AM
A God who let us prove his existence would be an idol.
 
2009-07-23 11:39:00 AM
Studson: But my own personal beliefs, I'd say that we are a minority. You may live in a region where that is not the case, but out of the entire population we def are. There are far more muslims than any religion.

Huh?

Christianity is the largest religion by at least several hundred million people. There are more than 2 billion Christians in the world, so unless you're one of those nutbars who considers Catholics not to be Christian, you're wrong.

In America, self-proclaimed Christians make up 70% of the population. Where do you live?
 
2009-07-23 11:39:11 AM
etant_donne: please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...


Duchamp's inability to fully ascertain the medium to which he entertained banality rendered his diatribe almost entirely shallow and pedantic. Furthermore the ontological imperative categorized by derrida is his widely accalaimed composition of deconstruction (as manifested in Jack Caputo's "deconstruction in a nutshell") is wholly inconclusive and nothing more than an artifice of menial logistics.

But I think you knew that already.
 
2009-07-23 11:39:39 AM
etant_donne
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.

please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...


Hey, there, I truly mean no offense but I have to ask. Are you under the impression that what you wrote was intelligible? I ask because, quite frankly it was gibberish. It was the kind of disjointed rambling that passes for conversation among methamphetamine abusers.
 
2009-07-23 11:40:21 AM
fireclown: I concur. Defacing Christian stuff is sort of an easy target for both publicity and gravitas as a big bad free thinkin' iconoclast.

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.

treesloth: Artist: Ooh, let's take something regarded as sacred and denigrate it! That'll piss them off!

FTA:
"Any offensive things that have been written are not the point of the work," Schrag told The Times newspaper.

The Metropolitan Community Church originally proposed the exhibition as a way of reclaiming the Bible as a sacred text."

I have known Baptists who sign each other's bibles like year books. They'll usually write something encouraging and cite a scripture. I don't think the artist was per se inviting people to deface the bible, whatever that means. The invitation was to write something in it. Some people might be offended that anyone would write in a bible. My Grandmother gave me a bible for my confirmation and wrote something nice in the inside cover. Any most bibles have pages in the front for geneologies, births, marriages, etc. Many people write study notes in their own bible, and you can buy study bibles with footnotes explaining what this word meant in Greek, or little historical tidbits. But, because of the headline, people in this thread assume the artist is doing some cheap shock art, and I am not convinced that is the case. The article also mentions that the exhibition includes a woman ripping pages from a bible and stuffing them into her underwear, and that sounds a little odd. But I am very skeptical of reporters. Is it in a painting of someone hiding or saving pages in the face of supposed religious persecution? Is it performance art? I don't know. The reporter doesn't say and the only thing mentioned about this is the part people might find offensive without any explanation.

When I was a kid, my pastor told a sermon about some guy in prison who decided to use the rice paper from one of those small bibles they give out for free to roll a cigarette. Evidentally other people had this idea before him, or so the story goes, and there was only one page left, but he read it and realized that God loved him or something, and the angels sang. There was much rejoicing. And do you know who that man was? Well, I don't either, but I'm sure it was pretty frickin' amazing. Let say it was my pastor, back in her murderin' days. The point is, if that were depicted in this exhibit, the reporter could state, "One exhibit even depicts a murderer ripping a page out of the bible to roll a cigarette." Why? Because the true shock "artists" in our society are journalists. They are instigators. I'm all for a free press, but I take what any reporter says with several grains of salt.
 
2009-07-23 11:41:53 AM
cinie.files.wordpress.com

His Gospel would be sweeeet.
 
2009-07-23 11:42:02 AM
... "I am Bi, Female & Proud. I want no god who is disappointed in this".

HA. I hear this a lot from you all, so why are you always trying to make excuses or worm your way into the word somehow ... if you don't want anything to do with it.
 
2009-07-23 11:42:04 AM
Jubeebee: Studson: But my own personal beliefs, I'd say that we are a minority. You may live in a region where that is not the case, but out of the entire population we def are. There are far more muslims than any religion.

Huh?

Christianity is the largest religion by at least several hundred million people. There are more than 2 billion Christians in the world, so unless you're one of those nutbars who considers Catholics not to be Christian, you're wrong.

In America, self-proclaimed Christians make up 70% of the population. Where do you live?


Damn, I stand corrected. But but but but bbut...I still got nothing.

I can still whine louder than you!!!
 
2009-07-23 11:42:04 AM
InternationalShoe: A God who let us prove his existence would be an idol.

a god who revealed himself would be a phenomenal deity- not an idol

humans would then make an idol of him by distilling phenomena and projecting upon the phenomena their own desires
 
2009-07-23 11:42:18 AM
HAMMERTOE: 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."

I know you read it cover to cover, so I'm sure you saw that part in Matthew 6 about what to pray for, but for those folks who haven't, some of the key points are:

I pray "...that your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." This is basically praying that the earth will become a more perfect place to live and affirming MY will is not important, and that God's will is infallible.

I pray that You "...give me this day my daily bread."
This is praying that my needs will be met for today. Not for millions of dollars, or that my team wins the World Cup, but that I have enough to eat.

I pray that You "...forgive my trespasses, as I forgive those who trespass against me."
This is asking for mercy, contingent on my showing the same mercy I wish to receive.

I pray that You "...lead me not into temptation."
This is recognition of one's weakness, asking that one be kept from temptation. We've already stated, however, that we want God's will to be done, so it's important to make the distinction that I'm asking God to arrange his will in such a way that I may avoid temptation, rather than asking for Him to submit to my will.



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?

This is a tough one to answer for sure without knowing exactly how heaven works, but seeing as how it's supposed to be eternal, it seems like it must exist outside of time, which makes memories just as real as anything else. Ever had a lucid, vivid dream with a deceased pet in it? Were they real within the context of that dream? I imagine heaven has similar capacity. If it didn't, it wouldn't be heaven, right? As an aside, I think question like this one are great for hypotheticals of what heaven would actually be like, if it exists.
 
2009-07-23 11:42:41 AM
1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.

2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.

3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.

4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.

5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1
 
2009-07-23 11:44:12 AM
DslainteC: You'd think the defenders of the bible would know a little of what's written inside. Jesus made it quite clear how non-believers would react to believers:

"If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you." - John 15:19 (NIV)

Don't expect others to pander to your beliefs; take up your cross and deal with the life you've chosen. In spite of what others might have told you, your faith will make your life harder, not an easy bed of roses. Read the damn book before you claim to be offended!


This this THIS THIS THIS
 
2009-07-23 11:44:29 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.

What do you think about this? Better yet, consider the following:

Five books have been placed into the exhibit, with the public invited to markup each. The four books are,

The Bible

The God Delusion

The Koran

Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe

A Short History of Time

Each has been marked up equally. Do you feel differently about defacing one book vs. another? Are you indifferent? Will you be burning and beheading in a fit of rage?

My opinion is one of indifference. They are not my copies of the texts, and the defacement has not changed my opinion of what is contained in any of them.

What do you think?
 
2009-07-23 11:44:40 AM
physt: 1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.

2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.

3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.

4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.

5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1


lolz
 
2009-07-23 11:45:50 AM
some attorney: have known Baptists who sign each other's bibles like year books. They'll usually write something encouraging and cite a scripture. I don't think the artist was per se inviting people to deface the bible, whatever that means. The invitation was to write something in it. Some people might be offended that anyone would write in a bible. My Grandmother gave me a bible for my confirmation and wrote something nice in the inside cover. Any most bibles have pages in the front for geneologies, births, marriages, etc

I found my great-grandmother's Bible after she passed away. She had underlined the word "joy" every time it showed up in the bible. Also it is not uncommon for people to write notes in it etc. And baptists do love to write words of encouragement when they give out Bibles to people.
 
2009-07-23 11:46:57 AM
Studson: Jubeebee: Studson: But my own personal beliefs, I'd say that we are a minority. You may live in a region where that is not the case, but out of the entire population we def are. There are far more muslims than any religion.

Huh?

Christianity is the largest religion by at least several hundred million people. There are more than 2 billion Christians in the world, so unless you're one of those nutbars who considers Catholics not to be Christian, you're wrong.

In America, self-proclaimed Christians make up 70% of the population. Where do you live?

Damn, I stand corrected. But but but but bbut...I still got nothing.

I can still whine louder than you!!!


And lo, let it be written, Studson became the first Farker to admit error in a religion thread. There was much rejoicing.
 
2009-07-23 11:47:57 AM
CrankMyBlueSax: 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.

What do you think about this? Better yet, consider the following:

Five books have been placed into the exhibit, with the public invited to markup each. The four books are,

The Bible

The God Delusion

The Koran

Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe

A Short History of Time

Each has been marked up equally. Do you feel differently about defacing one book vs. another? Are you indifferent? Will you be burning and beheading in a fit of rage?

My opinion is one of indifference. They are not my copies of the texts, and the defacement has not changed my opinion of what is contained in any of them.

What do you think?


My point is not so much what is going on in Glasgow, but the hypocrisy here on Fark. I can still answer your question if you want, but I think its wholly irrelevant to the original post.
 
2009-07-23 11:48:09 AM
etant_donne: InternationalShoe: A God who let us prove his existence would be an idol.

a god who revealed himself would be a phenomenal deity- not an idol

humans would then make an idol of him by distilling phenomena and projecting upon the phenomena their own desires


I have revealed Myself. I am neither of those things. I'm a Tank.
 
2009-07-23 11:48:23 AM
To you religious scholars:

When Satan/Lucifer shows Jesus the whole world by taking him to the top of a mountain...
What mountain is that? K2?
What if the world were an oblate spheroid?
Could he see all of it then?
 
2009-07-23 11:49:21 AM
Hickory-smoked: 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.

I disagree. It has been my experience that the defacement of Christian iconography has been exactly cultural chauvinism. Artists who work in this category are seldom (I can't think of a counter example) Chrisians themselves, having only the knowledge that can be absorbed by living in their community. In most cases, the purpose is to convey a belief that the religious iconography (and the underlying faith) is stupid, harmful and wrongheaded while the secular view that there is no God is clearly correct. It is far from a neutral standpoint, culturally chauvinistic as all get out. And sparing another of the great abrahamic faiths, which embodies many of the most despised traits (treatment of women, denial of science, ghastly treatment of gays) is something of a hypocrisy, imho.
 
2009-07-23 11:51:36 AM
CrankMyBlueSax: 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.

What do you think about this? Better yet, consider the following:

Five books have been placed into the exhibit, with the public invited to markup each. The four books are,

The Bible

The God Delusion

The Koran

Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe

A Short History of Time

Each has been marked up equally. Do you feel differently about defacing one book vs. another? Are you indifferent? Will you be burning and beheading in a fit of rage?

My opinion is one of indifference. They are not my copies of the texts, and the defacement has not changed my opinion of what is contained in any of them.

What do you think?


Shoiuldn't those be?

The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

and

A Brief History of Time
 
2009-07-23 11:52:08 AM
Mr. Coffee Nerves: Back when I was a fireman there were always stories -- from "the station across town" or a guy "who just retired, but he saw it with his own eyes" -- of the horrendous fire that destroyed a whole city block, leaving dozens homeless and many dead, yet, among the ruins a bible was found untouched by the flames and undamaged by the smoke or water.

I remember saying "So, God was perfectly fine with children dying of smoke inhalation and their bodies immolated beyond recognition as well as dozens of honest working people losing every one of their possessions, BUT, He used his infinite power to protect a $4.99 bible from Woolworth's?"

That God. What a sense of humor.


Well he did make us in his image so I would say that we share his awesome sense of humor.
 
2009-07-23 11:52:35 AM
Jubeebee: And lo, let it be written, Studson became the first Farker to admit error in a religion thread. There was much rejoicing.

Haha, ask Zamboro, he'll vouch that I do that quite often. I see no point in arguing until you are blue in the face when you've been clearly proven wrong. The only time I will argue until I am blue in the face is if I whole heartedly believe I am right, if I am right, or if I simply haven't seen where I am wrong yet. Admittedly they all can mesh together.
 
2009-07-23 11:53:19 AM
vertiaset: etant_donne
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.

please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...

Hey, there, I truly mean no offense but I have to ask. Are you under the impression that what you wrote was intelligible? I ask because, quite frankly it was gibberish. It was the kind of disjointed rambling that passes for conversation among methamphetamine abusers.


Clunky yes- I need coffee...

Unintelligible? the post above yours understood clearly what I wrote and rebutted quite well. Actually he/ she fixed perfectly upon the weak spot in each case. Points to him/her.

If I rambled too much for you, or went with syntax which was contrary to your liking or comprehension I apologize...

Am I forgiven?
 
2009-07-23 11:53:37 AM
jayessell: To you religious scholars:

When Satan/Lucifer shows Jesus the whole world by taking him to the top of a mountain...
What mountain is that? K2?
What if the world were an oblate spheroid?
Could he see all of it then?


When biblical passages refer to a "mountain", you may interpret this as a place that is "above" the places we normally tread. Thus, the mountain may be considered a place where Jesus could see in a way that we don't normally see. Like, you could say Lucifer gave Jesus some weed or maybe a few buttons of peyote.
 
2009-07-23 11:54:40 AM
Tricky Chicken: Shoiuldn't those be?

The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

and

A Brief History of Time


Indeed. I also seem to have had a problem with my counting. Thanks for the corrections.
 
2009-07-23 11:54:49 AM
CrankMyBlueSax: What do you think about this? Better yet, consider the following:

Five books have been placed into the exhibit, with the public invited to markup each. The four books are,

The Bible

The God Delusion

The Koran

Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe

A Short History of Time

Each has been marked up equally. Do you feel differently about defacing one book vs. another? Are you indifferent? Will you be burning and beheading in a fit of rage?

My opinion is one of indifference. They are not my copies of the texts, and the defacement has not changed my opinion of what is contained in any of them.

What do you think?


I think those last two are either (A)pirated copies or (B)previously unreleased works by authors I particularly enjoy. If A, do what you want to them. If B, you better let me read those before you start marking 'em up, or burning and beheading may well ensue.
 
2009-07-23 11:56:26 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.

First off, Read The Farking Article:
"The Metropolitan Community Church originally proposed the exhibition as a way of reclaiming the Bible as a sacred text."

And secondly, a Christian artist doing the same thing with a copy of "The God Delusion" wouldn't make any sense. The Bible is a document that, for good or ill, has been incorporated into every aspect of Western culture for some twelve to fifteen hundred years. Art works that incorporate it as a symbol are trying to speak about concepts that are both vast and globe-spanning, and also deeply personal and intimate.

A Dawkins book doesn't have any of that. There is a limited cultural influence you could talk about, but you'd get more mileage out of doing art about Orwell's "Animal Farm" or Seuss' "Hop on Pop." About the deepest statement an Anti-Atheist artist could make about Dawkins is "I don't like this book" and perhaps "Nobody else should either." And you're right; the Fark community would mock that artist for being a shallow, petty nutjob, because that's exactly what such a gesture would be.

Does that make any more sense now?
 
2009-07-23 11:57:55 AM
Diogenes [TotalFark] 2009-07-23 09:28:03 AM
Well that's kind of rude.

I may not accept it as my holy scripture, but this is silly.


^ This.


I note "artists", museums and these participants don't have the stones to do this to the koran.

What tough guys. Jump on the "turn your cheek" religion.
 
2009-07-23 11:58:47 AM
Studson: My point is not so much what is going on in Glasgow, but the hypocrisy here on Fark. I can still answer your question if you want, but I think its wholly irrelevant to the original post.

That's cool. You built a strawman to make a point. We all do it. I think you may be wrong though. I would suspect that the vast majority of atheists would have little attachment to a book they may have read and possibly enjoyed.
 
2009-07-23 11:59:31 AM
Snarcoleptic_Hoosier

Anytime I stay in a hotel, I autograph the Bible. Does that count?

A Mormon bible in the Kansas City (MO) Mariott has "To my #1 Fan. - God" in it


Impotent rage, vandal and Attention Whore all in one. Aren't you a piece of work.
 
2009-07-23 12:00:06 PM
rodeofrog:
When biblical passages refer to a "mountain", you may interpret this as a place that is "above" the places we normally tread. Thus, the mountain may be considered a place where Jesus could see in a way that we don't normally see. Like, you could say Lucifer gave Jesus some weed or maybe a few buttons of peyote.


You are wrong.

1. When you are on a mountain it is below you, not above.
2. You see the same on mountains as on not mountains, even Jesus, unless he was like a bat with the sonar but that is hearing anyways.
3. Lucifer could not give Jesus peyote because peyote is a cactus and there is no cactus in the bible, it is only in the Arizona desert.
 
2009-07-23 12:01:47 PM
I'm pretty much against defacing books.
 
2009-07-23 12:02:01 PM
etant_donne

please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...

Hey, there, I truly mean no offense but I have to ask. Are you under the impression that what you wrote was intelligible? I ask because, quite frankly it was gibberish. It was the kind of disjointed rambling that passes for conversation among methamphetamine abusers.

Clunky yes- I need coffee...

Unintelligible? the post above yours understood clearly what I wrote and rebutted quite well. Actually he/ she fixed perfectly upon the weak spot in each case. Points to him/her.

If I rambled too much for you, or went with syntax which was contrary to your liking or comprehension I apologize...

Am I forgiven?


You do not require my forgiveness. You are an intelligent person posting on an internet forum. Your literary sins were minor compared to most. Still, if it helps say three "Hail Marcels" and descend the nearest stair case au natural.
 
2009-07-23 12:03:31 PM
Hickory-smoked: 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.

First off, Read The Farking Article:
"The Metropolitan Community Church originally proposed the exhibition as a way of reclaiming the Bible as a sacred text."

And secondly, a Christian artist doing the same thing with a copy of "The God Delusion" wouldn't make any sense. The Bible is a document that, for good or ill, has been incorporated into every aspect of Western culture for some twelve to fifteen hundred years. Art works that incorporate it as a symbol are trying to speak about concepts that are both vast and globe-spanning, and also deeply personal and intimate.

A Dawkins book doesn't have any of that. There is a limited cultural influence you could talk about, but you'd get more mileage out of doing art about Orwell's "Animal Farm" or Seuss' "Hop on Pop." About the deepest statement an Anti-Atheist artist could make about Dawkins is "I don't like this book" and perhaps "Nobody else should either." And you're right; the Fark community would mock that artist for being a shallow, petty nutjob, because that's exactly what such a gesture would be.

Does that make any more sense now?


First off, Read my Farking Comment
"Fark would call them crazy, religious nutjobs etc."

And Secondly, I was pointing out the unadulterated Christian bashing that regularly occurs on this website. A Christian organization doing this in Glasgow was simply the vehicle in which I used to illustrate this observance I had. The Richard Dawkins book is a document, that, for good or ill, I used to illustrate as the thing which many Farkers could relate with as something CHristians may not be particularly fond of.

The Dawkins experiment was nothing more than a hypothetical to show how there is this double standard. I apologize for any inferences you may have had regarding my original post and I just advise that in the future you might carefully read over them before posting. Or in any even, you may aslo ask what I may have been trying to convey rather than jumping to conclusions. If you read the rest of my posts however this may have made more sense.
 
2009-07-23 12:05:13 PM
OnlyM3: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier

Anytime I stay in a hotel, I autograph the Bible. Does that count?

A Mormon bible in the Kansas City (MO) Mariott has "To my #1 Fan. - God" in it


Impotent rage, vandal and Attention Whore all in one. Aren't you a piece of work.


Also, when you say "Mormon bible" do you mean Book of Mormon? Because mormons consider the KJV Bible to be scripture as well as the Book of Mormon. And mormons routinely write notes to themselves and to others in the first few pages of their scriptures. In fact, the church encourages those who give scriptures to others to provide a hand-written note about love and faith to the recipient. The jerks.
 
2009-07-23 12:06:37 PM
vertiaset: You do not require my forgiveness. You are an intelligent person posting on an internet forum. Your literary sins were minor compared to most. Still, if it helps say three "Hail Marcels" and descend the nearest stair case au natural.

No studying of passages from Elements of Style? Or is that only for more egregious literary sins?
 
2009-07-23 12:07:18 PM
It's sad that so many people hate God and the lessons of these historical documents.
 
2009-07-23 12:07:49 PM
CrankMyBlueSax: That's cool. You built a strawman to make a point. We all do it. I think you may be wrong though. I would suspect that the vast majority of atheists would have little attachment to a book they may have read and possibly enjoyed.

Yeah my strawman was not the best example admittedly. (Actually it was piss poor weak) I wasn't trying to show the same attachment to the book but the fact that if it was Christians doing something loosely similar,(I use loosely in its loosest meaning), they would be bashed for what they were doing and if it is something doing something against the CHristians, those doing it are excused and or encouraged.
 
2009-07-23 12:07:54 PM
8.5 tailed fox: rodeofrog:
When biblical passages refer to a "mountain", you may interpret this as a place that is "above" the places we normally tread. Thus, the mountain may be considered a place where Jesus could see in a way that we don't normally see. Like, you could say Lucifer gave Jesus some weed or maybe a few buttons of peyote.

You are wrong.

1. When you are on a mountain it is below you, not above.
2. You see the same on mountains as on not mountains, even Jesus, unless he was like a bat with the sonar but that is hearing anyways.
3. Lucifer could not give Jesus peyote because peyote is a cactus and there is no cactus in the bible, it is only in the Arizona desert.


Well, I guess we'll have to meet in different churches, then. Our religious differences are obvious. Don't let your daughter date my son unless you want him corrupting her with his blasphemous ways.
 
2009-07-23 12:10:16 PM
jayessell: To you religious scholars:

When Satan/Lucifer shows Jesus the whole world by taking him to the top of a mountain...
What mountain is that? K2?
What if the world were an oblate spheroid?
Could he see all of it then?


The short answer is he used his devil powers. For someone who believes biblical stories, would it be tough to imagine that something supernatural is going on here? The first clue would be that it's in the bible. The second clue would be that Satan appeared.

There are a lot of things in the bible that people could take issue with and say it doesn't make sense. But questioning whether the devil could instantaneously show all the kingdoms of the earth is a strange one to pick. I mean, if someone is starting from the premise that Satan exists and can "appear," I would think the show-and-tell part that follows would not be much of a leap of faith.
 
2009-07-23 12:14:13 PM
Studson: etant_donne: please feel free to ignore the century or so of postmodernism behind the curtain...art is totally still all about dualistic notions of aesthetic beauty and the sublime...nothing else behind the curtain-

/whistling anxiously

p.s.- what duchamp showed us about art in the second decade of the twentieth century we are still coming to terms with- derrida wrote a half century later... (and is still reviled by much of academia) so the sinking in process could take a while...

Duchamp's inability to fully ascertain the medium to which he entertained banality rendered his diatribe almost entirely shallow and pedantic. Furthermore the ontological imperative categorized by derrida is his widely accalaimed composition of deconstruction (as manifested in Jack Caputo's "deconstruction in a nutshell") is wholly inconclusive and nothing more than an artifice of menial logistics.

But I think you knew that already.


I know both arguments well, but neither bears fruit particularly-
The works still stand. Whether we are talking about Duchamp's Fountain ,or Derrida's Grammatology, both stand as a delay (duchamp's word) that obstructs and forces an ontological/epistemological re-grounding in the viewer/ reader if they are to continue (or they can walk away in frustration)

As for "shallow and pedantic"- I might grant you the latter though it is inescapable in the context of the project to some degree, but I would refute shallow.

The streak against what art had become most likely started with the rejection of a version of the Nude Descending by the Puteaux group where his brothers belonged) because he endeavored to show a kind of motion that was not allowed within cubism's formalism and was alien even to the futurists... this may have also led him to question the correlation between media and concept.

His subsequent works, though few in number, ask the questions "what is art?", "what is desire and how is it satiable/insatiable?", and eventually (and this is my position regarding Given "will humans always force meaning upon things and build narratives where there are none?": things I would not consider shallow, which neatly bring us back to the subject at hand... mythological texts
 
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