Mohammed in Hell

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Ethelred


A simple thought about when the First Crusade occured shows that just a bit off.

We can always say that the true insanity of Christendom started with the Age of Discovery and Reformation.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Eli
Germanos, your sig says :

Eli for President !

Oops..Not anymore. It was in response to the beautifull map of the 12 tribes... Today is actually the first day it is actually there. (well, was..)

[Ned]

The painting is hardly consistent with the Pope's outreach to Islam.

Regardless, Mohammed did marry a 9-year old girl and waged aggressive war to spread the faith. The former act seems an offense against any God's teachings and by itself should condemn the man. The latter action is consistent with the conquests of Cyrus to spread Zoroastrianism, and with Charlemagne's conquest of the Saxons, the Crusades and the Spanish conquest of the new world to spread Christianity. Either all are wrong or none are wrong.

I personally think the Pope is right. It is time to seek common ground.

[Dr Strangelove]

If the picture isn't on state property I don't believe that they have a legitimate complaint. There are after all passages in the Koran stating exactly where the profit thought that non-muslims belonged. For that matter it would not surprise me to have a picture depicting christians suffering the punishment of the damned somewhere in all of Islam.

[Faeelin]

Leave it. Bear in mind it was made by narrow-minded oppressive religious leaders who treated the common folk like cattle, and leave it.

[oedo]

two atheists saying yes so far. doesn´t make much sense for me.

I am agnostic and say no.

[Lincoln]

Why don't they draw their own picture and put the Pope in hell. Seems like a simple solution -- plus they can put in a few more demons and flames if they want...

[Imran Siddiqui]

The former act seems an offense against any God's teachings

Seeing that he didn't have sex with her what does it matter?

[Bosh]

They could possibly put a plate beneath the fresco, saying that the painting represents historical, medieval thinking and not that of today's people.

Ah, good to know that the bits about people who didn't follow jesus all getting cast into lakes of fire and whatnot didn't make it into the new edition, I always thought they broke up the narrative...

[Hueij]

Hm... I hope I won't forget to remind some of the people here of this thread when there is another outburst here when someone shows another painting in the near future of the Holy Virgin made of african elephant poop...

[Lincoln]

I think that outburst Hueij was mostly concerned about it being a government sponsored (or subsidized) event.

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Lincoln
I think that outburst Hueij was mostly concerned about it being a government sponsored (or subsidized) event.

Ja, you are right. Art should only be subsidised when it shocks no one, God forbid. Norman Rockwell springs to mind...

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, art shouldn't be subsidised at all .

[Lincoln]

I think that people should buy their own paint. After all, how much money did it cost to buy a pound of dung and a plastic statue of the virgin Mary?

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Lincoln
I think that people should buy their own paint. After all, how much money did it cost to buy a pound of dung and a plastic statue of the virgin Mary?

I'm not going to argue this. People said, when they saw Guernica, that it looked like something their little nephew could have made...

It's 2am over here, so goodnight y'all