Statue Of A Homeless Jesus Startles A Wealthy Community - Polidicks

[QUOTE=LegndNikko;44538027]If they're truly charitable, I'm sure they'll give away all their fortune. By the time they would reach heaven, they'd be rich, no more.[/QUOTE] If you keep yourself wealthy and donate a certain part of your profits, you can give away a hell of a lot more than if you dump a lump sum. Jesus clearly wasn't an economist.

[QUOTE=Riller;44538051]If you keep yourself wealthy and donate a certain part of your profits, you can give away a hell of a lot more than if you dump a lump sum. Jesus clearly wasn't an economist.[/QUOTE] Two verses earlier: [QUOTE] Looking at the man, Jesus felt genuine love for him. “There is still one thing you haven’t done,” he told him. “Go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=AntonioR;44537894]That is one dumb statue. Imagine if Michelangelo made stuff like this instead of Pieta or David ? He would be long forgotten...[/QUOTE] IIRC, Michelangelo actually made subliminal messages in his paintings because he despised the Catholic Church, and how it constantly screwed over artisans.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44538195]Two verses earlier:[/QUOTE] But, you see, if Jesus had said "There is still one thing you haven't done. Go and invest all your wealth in bitcoins to sell at a later date and then give all of your profits from that to the poor, whereafter you reinvest your initial sum in a new lucrative fad. Alternatively, bank them with high interest until the end of times and let 75% of the interest go to the poor, and 25% to the pool to increase future interest.", the poor would be better off.

‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ While a good reminder to Christendom of how it is meant to treat those within it's ranks, I feel that this is more of a Christian inspired piece rather than outwardly Christian. It seems to be preaching a sort of social gospel through a literal depiction of the Christ's above quote, but merely that, which is hardly the main point of Christianity. While incorporating the image of the Christ, it throws away the chance of reminding us of his sacrifice in our place and the wages of our sinful nature, using his wounds as a mere tool of identification. The message is not a bad one by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn't really fit the context of a church, where the soul purpose is to expose our sinfulness through the law and proclaim the gospel in response.

[QUOTE=Riller;44537964]Always hated that verse. What about charitable rich people?[/QUOTE] Well you're actually supposed to give up all of your possessions and follow Jesus. His teachings make a lot more sense once you realize that he was an apocalyptic preacher who thought the world was coming to an end soon after his death.

[QUOTE=AntonioR;44537894]That is one dumb statue. Imagine if Michelangelo made stuff like this instead of Pieta or David ? He would be long forgotten...[/QUOTE] You might have a good point. Michelangelo's statue of David for instance looks different depending on what perspective you have. There is depth to his artistry, is what I'm saying. I can't say for sure from just this photo, but I doubt this statue of Jesus sleeping it off on a bench looks any different from other angles. It's very superficial, it does have a message, but is it great or even good art? Meh.

[QUOTE=Explosions;44538636]Well you're actually supposed to give up all of your possessions and follow Jesus. His teachings make a lot more sense once you realize that he was an apocalyptic preacher who thought the world was coming to an end soon after his death.[/QUOTE] If the world is ending, what would a hobo use my xbox for? [editline]14th April 2014[/editline] Furthermore, isn't it a sin to damn other people to hell? If rich people can't get into heaven, so I dump all my wealth on a poor person so I can go to heaven... Doesn't that just mean that now, all of a sudden, the ex-poor person can't go to heaven due to now being rich? Wouldn't he be better off being poor and going to heaven?

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;44538036]There's also the parable of the rich man who gives just a smidgen of money to the temple, then the old widow who gives her only coin. Basically, if you're rich, give what you can as much as you can. Don't keep it as your own.[/QUOTE] I intend on giving away the vast majority of my money upon my death. I figure there will be more net good if I'm investing that money for my whole life than if I give it all away now.

That's a brilliant design for a statue

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;44536349]He was a rich and white gun owner.[/QUOTE] Reminds me of this: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xgPbFz4.png[/IMG]

After reading all the people quoting contradicting bible quotes [video=youtube;biTiWhPEPHo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biTiWhPEPHo[/video]

[QUOTE=Griffster26;44537765]It's a model of it but point still stands.[/QUOTE] It needs to be at least three times bigger!

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44538203]IIRC, Michelangelo actually made subliminal messages in his paintings because he despised the Catholic Church, and how it constantly screwed over artisans.[/QUOTE] This is bullshit "da vinci-code" pseudo-historian crud done by what are essentially mild conspiracy theorists instead of actual art historians. Nothing even suggests this being the case. Michelangelo was a devout catholic especially at the end of his life. He didn't care for some of the political actions the church did later in his career because at the time, the church was essentially a governing body, and such governing powers frequently caused issues in his life. Such as, when the pope and the holy roman empire attacked Florence for largely political reasons, while Michelangelo was there. Florance was his native city, so Michelangelo didn't take kindly to it. Michelangelo was also at one point (I think during his first time he spent in Rome) trying to square away details of a possible commission that he was summoned to Rome for the Pope, but the Pope kept blowing him off until Michelangelo got so angry he headed back to Florence. I don't think there is any doubt that Michelangelo was not a fan of the political situation, or the corruption in the church at the time (this was the time when the Reformation and Lutheranism started becoming a thing). I do think its silly to assume he despised the catholic church considering the church is what made him a wealthy and famous man, he was devoutly religious, and considering if he really didn't like the church he could just become Lutheran which is a sect of Christianity that literally came into being as a direct criticism of the catholic church in his time period. The only thing that suggests any sort of subliminal message is the figure of Minos (depicted with donkey ears as mythologically he was considered a "bad judge" in fables) in The Last Judgement - according to direct sources from the time period the figure was based off a member of the church who critisized the nudity in the work as being distasteful and not art. So, supposedly as a kind of revenge michelangelo painted the bastard in as an offensive character having his junk being bitten off. The pope at the time supposedly thought it as humourous. [img]http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/images/Minos-Michelangelo-Last-Sup.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Riller;44538051]If you keep yourself wealthy and donate a certain part of your profits, you can give away a hell of a lot more than if you dump a lump sum. Jesus clearly wasn't an economist.[/QUOTE] context is everything, i'm pretty sure using your wealth to continually aid the poor in the manner some rich folks do nowadays(like bill gates), would be seen as a good thing(which is easier to do nowadays thanks to how our society works), but for anyone with a modicum of intelligence, it would also be foolish to ignore how a noticeable part of the rich, acquire their riches through exploitation, thus being part of the problem(especially in antiquity). [QUOTE]Proverbs 22:20-23 : 20 Have I not written thirty sayings for you, sayings of counsel and knowledge, 21 teaching you to be honest and to speak the truth, so that you bring back truthful reports to those you serve? 22 Do not exploit the poor because they are poor and do not crush the needy in court, 23 for the LORD will take up their case and will exact life for life.[/QUOTE] its kinda obvious that the entire message can be summed as "help those in need, don't exploit them", also known as "don't be a jackass", which can be said for most moral lessons, when you get down to it.

[QUOTE=KorJax;44539454]This is bullshit "da vinci-code" pseudo-historian crud done by what are essentially mild conspiracy theorists instead of actual art historians. Nothing even suggests this being the case. Michelangelo was a devout catholic especially at the end of his life. He didn't care for some of the political actions the church did later in his career because at the time, the church was essentially a governing body, and such governing powers frequently caused issues in his life. Such as, when the pope and the holy roman empire attacked Florence for largely political reasons, while Michelangelo was there. Florance was his native city, so Michelangelo didn't take kindly to it. Michelangelo was also at one point (I think during his first time he spent in Rome) trying to square away details of a possible commission that he was summoned to Rome for the Pope, but the Pope kept blowing him off until Michelangelo got so angry he headed back to Florence. I don't think there is any doubt that Michelangelo was not a fan of the political situation, or the corruption in the church at the time (this was the time when the Reformation and Lutheranism started becoming a thing). I do think its silly to assume he despised the catholic church considering the church is what made him a wealthy and famous man, he was devoutly religious, and considering if he really didn't like the church he could just become Lutheran which is a sect of Christianity that literally came into being as a direct criticism of the catholic church in his time period. The only thing that suggests any sort of subliminal message is the figure of Minos (depicted with donkey ears as mythologically he was considered a "bad judge" in fables) in The Last Judgement - according to direct sources from the time period the figure was based off a member of the church who critisized the nudity in the work as being distasteful and not art. So, supposedly as a kind of revenge michelangelo painted the bastard in as an offensive character having his junk being bitten off. The pope at the time supposedly thought it as humourous. [img]http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/images/Minos-Michelangelo-Last-Sup.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] lol he has a snake biting his penis

i'd be honored to have such a nice statue in my neighborhood. i'm not even christian

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;44539801]context is everything, i'm pretty sure using your wealth to continually aid the poor in the manner some rich folks do nowadays(like bill gates), would be seen as a good thing(which is easier to do nowadays thanks to how our society works), but for anyone with a modicum of intelligence, it would also be foolish to ignore how a noticeable part of the rich, acquire their riches through exploitation, thus being part of the problem(especially in antiquity). [/QUOTE] Bill Gates could donate more than whatever he is donating, though. In the end, all wealthy can donate majority of their income to the point of living lower middle class lifestyle, which to me is the best workable practice of that passage.

[QUOTE=KorJax;44539454]This is bullshit "da vinci-code" pseudo-historian crud done by what are essentially mild conspiracy theorists instead of actual art historians. Nothing even suggests this being the case. Michelangelo was a devout catholic especially at the end of his life. He didn't care for some of the political actions the church did later in his career because at the time, the church was essentially a governing body, and such governing powers frequently caused issues in his life. Such as, when the pope and the holy roman empire attacked Florence for largely political reasons, while Michelangelo was there. Florance was his native city, so Michelangelo didn't take kindly to it. Michelangelo was also at one point (I think during his first time he spent in Rome) trying to square away details of a possible commission that he was summoned to Rome for the Pope, but the Pope kept blowing him off until Michelangelo got so angry he headed back to Florence. I don't think there is any doubt that Michelangelo was not a fan of the political situation, or the corruption in the church at the time (this was the time when the Reformation and Lutheranism started becoming a thing). I do think its silly to assume he despised the catholic church considering the church is what made him a wealthy and famous man, he was devoutly religious, and considering if he really didn't like the church he could just become Lutheran which is a sect of Christianity that literally came into being as a direct criticism of the catholic church in his time period. The only thing that suggests any sort of subliminal message is the figure of Minos (depicted with donkey ears as mythologically he was considered a "bad judge" in fables) in The Last Judgement - according to direct sources from the time period the figure was based off a member of the church who critisized the nudity in the work as being distasteful and not art. So, supposedly as a kind of revenge michelangelo painted the bastard in as an offensive character having his junk being bitten off. The pope at the time supposedly thought it as humourous. [img]http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/images/Minos-Michelangelo-Last-Sup.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Actually, Michelangelo was primarily a sculptor, and the then Pope asked him to do the artwork on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel instead. Michelangelo was miffed and insisted to His Holiness that he was primarily a sculptor and that his painting skills were second-rate by comparison. His Holiness, however, told him that either he did as ordered, or he would have to work gratis. Or would not get to work at all, whichever was worse. So the poor fellow had no choice but to go ahead with it. However, he trolled the pope when he sent him a receipt for his first salary, which read as follows: "I, Michelangelo Buonarotti, [i]sculptor[/i], have received 500 ducats on account from His Holiness the Pope for [i]painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.[/i]" The Pope took the point as expected.

[QUOTE=Explosions;44536284]"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."[/QUOTE] I tried to push my camel through the eye of a needle once I got blood fucking everywhere

[QUOTE=Maloof?;44541649]I tried to push my camel through the eye of a needle once I got blood fucking everywhere[/QUOTE] I tried pushing a camel through the eye of a needle; I ended up pushing the needle through the camel.

[QUOTE=aydin690;44538818]Reminds me of this: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xgPbFz4.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Wow Jeesus what's with the lack of trigger discipline?!? My fucking heartbeat measurement design hooked up to my electric scooter is going crazy right now holy moly

What an incredibly important statue.

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;44536242]Wich is why ive always found Catholicism ridiculous.[/QUOTE] uhhh, out of all the christian denominations, Catholicism is probably the least insane.

Don't see why people on FP bother quoting the Bible in threads where the primary topic is Christian religion, contradictions are more rife than herpes in a shady bordello in a third world country.

Homeless people can either be awesome and total fucking idiots and that's why they are homeless. Like this guy who straight up asked me for "cash for booze". Then grabbed at me because he saw I had money. There was an awesome homeless guy who also happened to be a Veteran, he lost everything by the time he got back and was just super interesting to talk to. Just have to realize that some people are homeless because they are actually shitty people who have problems and refused to address them. In my opinion, better preemptive mental health plans could go a long way here

[QUOTE=Explosions;44536284]"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."[/QUOTE] What a nice way to start a selmon... "Did that never make you feel uncomfortable?"

these are probably the same kind of people that get super offended if they're reminded that jesus probably wasnt white

[QUOTE=Riller;44538716]If the world is ending, what would a hobo use my xbox for? [editline]14th April 2014[/editline] Furthermore, isn't it a sin to damn other people to hell? If rich people can't get into heaven, so I dump all my wealth on a poor person so I can go to heaven... Doesn't that just mean that now, all of a sudden, the ex-poor person can't go to heaven due to now being rich? Wouldn't he be better off being poor and going to heaven?[/QUOTE] By being charitable and giving everything to the poor, you damn them. Your altruism may put you on a good foot with God, but your actions condemn the ex-poor to an eternity of suffering. It is therefore, in retrospect, a grave sin to distribute wealth to the poor. It is selfish and wholly evil. Keep your riches so that the poor schmucks can at least go to Heaven. Don't just sit on it either. Live an avaricious, lavish lifestyle. Yachts, parties, clubs, sex, drugs, rock'n'roll. The works. Be as sinful as you can possibly be so that your devotion ensures a place in Heaven for all the poor poor. Surely your sacrifice convinces God of the purity of your eternal soul.

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44541732]Wow Jeesus what's with the lack of trigger discipline?!? My fucking heartbeat measurement design hooked up to my electric scooter is going crazy right now holy moly[/QUOTE] trigger discipline is for commie, godless, muslim terrorists. :v: