Holy ********* Crazy

[GMDino]

(06-06-2017, 01:23 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: that looks like Jesus. 

He is kind of white. 

[GMDino]

(06-06-2017, 12:34 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It is a good question and it was posed to you.  Maybe you could actually answer it?  Why don't people make likenesses of Mohammed?

(06-06-2017, 01:27 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I'll answer.

Because theyll be praised by Muslims for doing so and nobody wants to be praised by Muslims.

Muslim's forbid depictions of Mohammed. Although from what I have gathered that is a man made law not in the Quran.

But really there is no reason for anyone else to not do it.  

Kind of like how early Jews could even say Jehova.  The Torah talks about blasphemy, but it was man's traditions that resulted in the punishments.


Anyway...

[Dill]

(06-06-2017, 12:46 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Here. I made an image of Muhammad:



Muhammad

I'm sorry Zona but that is not Muhammad. It is Zubayr ibn al-Awam, one of his military commanders. It is an understandable mistake because they were related and looked very much alike.

[BengalHawk62]

(06-06-2017, 01:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: He is kind of white. 

Maybe he's just doing the Jesus Christ pose?

[Belsnickel]

(06-06-2017, 01:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Muslim's forbid depictions of Mohammed. Although from what I have gathered that is a man made law not in the Quran.

But really there is no reason for anyone else to not do it.  

This, and it also wasn't always a rule. There are some artistic depictions of Mohammed from the earlier days of Islam that are wonderful examples of art in the region.

[Dill]

(06-06-2017, 01:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Muslim's forbid depictions of Mohammed. Although from what I have gathered that is a man made law not in the Quran.

But really there is no reason for anyone else to not do it.  

Kind of like how early Jews could even say Jehova.  The Torah talks about blasphemy, but it was man's traditions that resulted in the punishments.

Actually, there are lots of Muslim pictures of Mohammad. Zombietime has collected a bunch of them here.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/

Here is a picture of Mohammed in our own Supreme Court chamber. I got it from a WaPo article explaining how the taboo of depcting Mohammed arose, since it is not forbidden in the Qu'ran.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/16/how-images-of-the-prophet-muhammad-became-forbidden/?utm_term=.292f28d2e0c5

[Matt_Crimson]

(06-06-2017, 01:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Muslim's forbid depictions of Mohammed. Although from what I have gathered that is a man made law not in the Quran.

But really there is no reason for anyone else to not do it.  

Kind of like how early Jews could even say Jehova.  The Torah talks about blasphemy, but it was man's traditions that resulted in the punishments.


Anyway...

Well I wouldn't becessarily call it a man made law in terms of separating explicit laws in the Koran vs laws that were made up independent of it.

The law forbidding depictions of Mohammed is based upon interpretation of scripture and not just made up out of thin air. Religious texts are never simply looked at as a bunch of laws, and shouldn't be. It's a mix of explicitely stated laws and laws made from interpretation.

[GMDino]

(06-06-2017, 02:16 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Well I wouldn't becessarily call it a man made law in terms of separating explicit laws in the Koran vs laws that were made up independent of it.

The law forbidding depictions of Mohammed is based upon interpretation of scripture and not just made up out of thin air. Religious texts are never simply looked at as a bunch of laws, and shouldn't be. It's a mix of explicitely stated laws and laws made from interpretation.

I have always held the opinion that if a man is using his interpretation of holy text to make a law or rule not in the text then said rule must be looked at with a jaundiced eye.

Took years of being out of Catholic school to figure that one out...lol.

[BengalHawk62]

(06-06-2017, 02:11 PM)Dill Wrote: Actually, there are lots of Muslim pictures of Mohammad. Zombietime has collected a bunch of them here.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/

Here is a picture of Mohammed in our own Supreme Court chamber. I got it from a WaPo article explaining how the taboo of depcting Mohammed arose, since it is not forbidden in the Qu'ran.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/16/how-images-of-the-prophet-muhammad-became-forbidden/?utm_term=.292f28d2e0c5

Dumb question.......
If that guy in the middle is supposed to depict Mohammed, who's the guys on the right and left?

[Dill]

(06-06-2017, 03:21 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Dumb question.......
If that guy in the middle is supposed to depict Mohammed, who's the guys on the right and left?

On your left is Charlemagne, with broadsword and the Roman Catholic cross stuck in a ball.

On the right is Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, the code giver.

[Dill]

(06-06-2017, 02:16 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Well I wouldn't becessarily call it a man made law in terms of separating explicit laws in the Koran vs laws that were made up independent of it.

The law forbidding depictions of Mohammed is based upon interpretation of scripture and not just made up out of thin air. Religious texts are never simply looked at as a bunch of laws, and shouldn't be. It's a mix of explicitely stated laws and laws made from interpretation.

One of the Hadith explicitly states that all pictures of humans and animals are forbidden. (Sahih Muslim 5268)

Just a heads up for Cristian friends out there--people who get exercised over the image of Mohammed may also condemn images of Jesus and Moses.

[Bengalzona]

(06-06-2017, 01:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: He is kind of white. 

You're white... I mean, you're right!


Here, I have decided to amend my original image and go for an even darker look:



Muhammad




What do you think? :andy:

[Bengalzona]

(06-06-2017, 01:44 PM)Dill Wrote:
I'm sorry Zona but that is not Muhammad. It is Zubayr ibn al-Awam, one of his military commanders. It is an understandable mistake because they were related and looked very much alike.

Here is Zubayr ibn al-Awam:

[Bengalzona]

(06-06-2017, 01:23 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: that looks like Jesus. 

Here is Jesus:

[NATI BENGALS]

(06-06-2017, 02:11 PM)Dill Wrote: Actually, there are lots of Muslim pictures of Mohammad. Zombietime has collected a bunch of them here.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/

Here is a picture of Mohammed in our own Supreme Court chamber. I got it from a WaPo article explaining how the taboo of depcting Mohammed arose, since it is not forbidden in the Qu'ran.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/16/how-images-of-the-prophet-muhammad-became-forbidden/?utm_term=.292f28d2e0c5

I knew it. Obama probably put that up with his secret Sharia law takeover.

[Rotobeast]

(06-06-2017, 12:46 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Here. I made an image of Muhammad:



Muhammad

It's been nice knowing you, you crazy bastard.

P.S.- His nipples are crooked.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[NATI BENGALS]

(06-06-2017, 08:03 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: It's been nice knowing you, you crazy bastard.

P.S.- His nipples are crooked.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Its the internet bro. Nipples are censored in new great again America.

Terrorists use them and stuff. And its good for business to censor

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-06-2017, 01:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Muslim's forbid depictions of Mohammed. Although from what I have gathered that is a man made law not in the Quran.

But really there is no reason for anyone else to not do it.

Really, there's no reason why a non-muslim would have to not depict Mohammed in a public fashion?
 

Quote:Kind of like how early Jews could even say Jehova.  The Torah talks about blasphemy, but it was man's traditions that resulted in the punishments.

For historical comparison, sure.  However, we're talking about right now.

Quote:Anyway...

An interesting vid choice.  I feel like there's one group of people still engaging in the 2000 year old behavior depicted in it.  Who is it?   Hmmmmm

[Dill]

(06-06-2017, 09:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Really, there's no reason why a non-muslim would have to not depict Mohammed in a public fashion?
 
For historical comparison, sure.  However, we're talking about right now.

An interesting vid choice.  I feel like there's one group of people still engaging in the 2000 year old behavior depicted in it.  Who is it?   Hmmmmm

I feel like MORE than one group of people is still engaging in scapegoating.

We're talking about right now.

Who are they? Hmmmmmm

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-06-2017, 09:46 PM)Dill Wrote: I feel like MORE than one group of people is still engaging in scapegoating.

An interesting statement considering the etymology of that term.

Quote:We're talking about right now.

Indeed we are.

Quote:Who are they? Hmmmmmm

Whoever they are I'm sure you'll label them racists.  If we're talking about "scapegoating" though I suppose we'll have to include just about the entire human race.