Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Representations and depictions of the deity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Ronson View Post

    This is the general hypothesis (in this case, regarding Egypt specifically): https://medium.com/@fillaman72/why-d...s-74aee790a5be

    [box] Although Egypt was conquered many times by outsiders (the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians etc.), you will be surprised to know that the many political changes did not actually affect the appearance and complexion of the Egyptian population.

    In fact the ancient Egyptians look much the same as present day Egyptians.
    Hmmm a rather Afrocentrist article "The most important lesson is not the skin complexion, but rather the fact that they were Africans who achieved great things. This fact that Africans achieved such greatness is a punch in the gut of Eurocentrists who are always trying hard to convince people that “Nothing great can come out of Africa”.

    Instead of accepting the simple fact that the ancient Egyptian civilization was an indigenous African civilization invented by Africans, these Eurocentrists are in disbelief, and would rather foolishly ascribe the civilization to “alien” origin or “extraterrestrials
    ”.

    One might opine that the various peoples of the African continent might take offence at being lumped together as "Africans".


    Originally posted by Ronson View Post
    All anyone can guess is a general appearance, in any case.
    That is correct we can only apply generalisations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronson
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.
    This is the general hypothesis (in this case, regarding Egypt specifically): https://medium.com/@fillaman72/why-d...s-74aee790a5be

    Although Egypt was conquered many times by outsiders (the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians etc.), you will be surprised to know that the many political changes did not actually affect the appearance and complexion of the Egyptian population.

    In fact the ancient Egyptians look much the same as present day Egyptians.

    One thing to note is that even in situations of large scale invasions/migrations, the “general appearance of the original indigenous population does not change much”. The reason for this is that even when a group of foreigners invade in large numbers, the original indigenous population is always several times larger, so research has shown that it is always the invaders who often transform overtime to look like the indigenes, and not the other way round.


    Makes sense to me.

    As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

    However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

    However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.
    All anyone can guess is a general appearance, in any case.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Firstly there is no attested extraneous evidence concerning the background of a historical figure that we now regard as Jesus of Nazareth, and secondly given the known history of the region, the possibility that he was a descendant of converts cannot be entirely ruled out.
    IOW, in your view, Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk is a completely viable possibility, little to no different from any other.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    If we set all evidence aside and settle for wild speculation, virtually anything is possible. Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk.
    Firstly there is no attested extraneous evidence concerning the background of a historical figure that we now regard as Jesus of Nazareth, and secondly given the known history of the region, the possibility that he was a descendant of converts cannot be entirely ruled out.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.

    As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

    However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

    However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.
    If we set all evidence aside and settle for wild speculation, virtually anything is possible. Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Ronson View Post
    It all depends on Mary's lineage, and that is vague.

    Allegedly, people from the Mediterranean region haven't change much in 2K years.
    I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.

    As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

    However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

    However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.



    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

    They are interesting prohibitions.

    The prohibition against graven images applies to "anything in heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters below," and yet the same book -- Exodus -- records the specifications for the Ark of the Covenant, including graven images of cherubim for the cover.
    And the full context is that such things are not to be made as objects of worship. Scripture doesn't prohibit artwork as such.

    The prohibition against speaking YHWH is not found in Scripture. (I am skeptical there was a prohibition against writing it. If there were, it would not occur in Scripture, but it does.) I've always been a bit bemused by the fact that I AM was very explicit in revealing His name to Moses, and told Him,

    And yet at some point they became reverently afraid to actually "call" Him by that name. When they read the Scriptures and came to YHWH, rather than speak it, they spoke "Adonai."
    The prohibition is against speaking the name in vain - not against speaking the name. I assume primarily as a matter of not using God's name in (by either definition) oaths. Noteworthy is the existence of early manuscripts in which the name of God is (by contrast with the rest of the manuscript) not written in Hebrew, but in Paleo-Hebrew.

    Leave a comment:


  • NorrinRadd
    replied
    Originally posted by Machinist View Post
    Also, if anyone could tell me...but I read somewhere that the ancient Jews were the first to have this notion of an image-less deity (no graven image), the name also couldn't be spoken or written. I've read that no other religion has ever had such a concept.
    They are interesting prohibitions.

    The prohibition against graven images applies to "anything in heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters below," and yet the same book -- Exodus -- records the specifications for the Ark of the Covenant, including graven images of cherubim for the cover.

    The prohibition against speaking YHWH is not found in Scripture. (I am skeptical there was a prohibition against writing it. If there were, it would not occur in Scripture, but it does.) I've always been a bit bemused by the fact that I AM was very explicit in revealing His name to Moses, and told Him,

    “This is my name forever,
    the name you shall call me
    from generation to generation."

    And yet at some point they became reverently afraid to actually "call" Him by that name. When they read the Scriptures and came to YHWH, rather than speak it, they spoke "Adonai."

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronson
    replied
    It all depends on Mary's lineage, and that is vague.

    Allegedly, people from the Mediterranean region haven't change much in 2K years. With that as a reference, I'd select this northern Egyptian figure as a likely depiction.
    Around 30, ordinary appearance.

    egypt.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • alaskazimm
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    When you become a Christian, then you may comment on Christianity. Your rules.
    I think she's a rules for thee but not for me type.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    As we all know Christians have often killed one another over icons.

    That is yet another tension in the religion where it tries [unsuccessfully] to reconcile the unseen and ineffable deity of Judaism with Hellenistic anthropomorphic deities. One religion was iconoclastic the others not.
    When you become a Christian, then you may comment on Christianity. Your rules.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    The Bible makes it clear that such lapses were very common.
    What makes you think these were lapses?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Machinist View Post

    HaHa!


    I'm not too sure as to the attitudes toward icons and artefacts such as this within Christendom though. I often hear protestants charge Catholics with Idolatry. In Hebrew history, yes, there was a direct command to not make any graven image, but there isn't anything in the NT about this issue as far as I know.
    As we all know Christians have often killed one another over icons.

    That is yet another tension in the religion where it tries [unsuccessfully] to reconcile the unseen and ineffable deity of Judaism with Hellenistic anthropomorphic deities. One religion was iconoclastic the others not.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post



    And of course the "Priestly" views were not always followed by the ordinary man or woman, as the "folk religion" of archaeological evidence has attested with regard to Asherah, the goddess that was venerated as the traditional consort of the god Yahweh, the god of the Bible..
    The Bible makes it clear that such lapses were very common.

    Leave a comment:


  • Machinist
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Fair enough. It seems very odd to me to use such a representation for contemplation.

    It reminds me of the joke about the old Jewish gentleman in the Catholic hospital. Naturally his room contained a crucifix on the wall which he asked the nurse to remove, noting that "one suffering Jew is enough ".
    HaHa!


    I'm not too sure as to the attitudes toward icons and artefacts such as this within Christendom though. I often hear protestants charge Catholics with Idolatry. In Hebrew history, yes, there was a direct command to not make any graven image, but there isn't anything in the NT about this issue as far as I know.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by tabibito, 05-12-2022, 10:42 PM
42 responses
299 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by Alien, 03-31-2022, 02:43 PM
1,993 responses
10,796 views
0 likes
Last Post little_monkey  
Started by rstrats, 02-13-2021, 12:23 PM
59 responses
512 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X