|
Post by mystery on Jul 31, 2021 1:22:04 GMT
When I was in India, I talked to a number of Muslims who disparaged the Hindus for idolatry, and they said that was why they don't worship images of Mohammed. I have to admit, I strongly prefer Islamic art to Hindu art. Hinduism is a fascinating religion, but Islamic art and architecture has an elegance and timeless that I find absolutely stunning. Some religious iconography in other religions can be a little over the top. I don't think it has as much to do with worshiping the images as it does the mere existence of the images themselves. Nobody got shot because they were kneeling before a cartoon. True, I'm just saying that forbidding idolatry is possibly part of their rationale for prohibiting images of Allah or Mohammed from being created. That seems to be the thing most of them focused on, although I was there before Charlie Hebdo.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 31, 2021 1:30:28 GMT
I don't think it has as much to do with worshiping the images as it does the mere existence of the images themselves. Nobody got shot because they were kneeling before a cartoon. True, I'm just saying that forbidding idolatry is possibly part of their rationale for prohibiting images of Allah or Mohammed from being created. That seems to be the thing most of them focused on, although I was there before Charlie Hebdo. Par for the religious course, I'd say it's part of their misconstrued rationale.
|
|
|
Post by mystery on Jul 31, 2021 1:41:01 GMT
True, I'm just saying that forbidding idolatry is possibly part of their rationale for prohibiting images of Allah or Mohammed from being created. That seems to be the thing most of them focused on, although I was there before Charlie Hebdo. Par for the religious course, I'd say it's part of their misconstrued rationale. I just googled a bit. It sounds like non-Muslims are not bound by the prohibition against creating graven images of the prophets, but they considered the Charlie Hebdo cartoon to be blasphemous because it was mocking and disrespectful toward Mohammed. The issue there was the blasphemy, not just the creation of an image. It was essentially just a culture clash, one side trying to protect their freedoms, and the other side trying to protect their faith. It would be nice if the radical Muslims would realize that they did far more damage to their religion's reputation than the cartoon ever did...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 31, 2021 2:24:53 GMT
Par for the religious course, I'd say it's part of their misconstrued rationale. I just googled a bit. It sounds like non-Muslims are not bound by the prohibition against creating graven images of the prophets, but they considered the Charlie Hebdo cartoon to be blasphemous because it was mocking and disrespectful toward Mohammed. The issue there was the blasphemy, not just the creation of an image. It was essentially just a culture clash, one side trying to protect their freedoms, and the other side trying to protect their faith. It would be nice if the radical Muslims would realize that they did far more damage to their religion's reputation than the cartoon ever did... Yeah, it's all fun and games until 12 people get shot. Sucks to be an infidel, it would seem.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 31, 2021 2:33:05 GMT
I don't think it has as much to do with worshiping the images as it does the mere existence of the images themselves. Nobody got shot because they were kneeling before a cartoon. However, think of the millions of people who have been executed for worshipping the wrong God or owning the image of a pagan a god that is not the official one. And it's not like we don't flog people in the USA for trying to ignore the busy-body religious. When some states started putting "in God we trust" on license plates, people who didn't want to pay for and have a religious message on the automobile have had to sue in court to re-establish their right to freedom from religion. Nice resolution to the problem. Everybody is happy. GG, Georgia. It's freedom of religion, and in no way does it even imply a right to, say, never see a church or run across a televangelist while channel surfing, but making an entire state put "In God We Trust" on their cars is definitely a few steps too far. I'm guessing there were probably many religious people on the nay side as well.
|
|