They weren't saying the event called the last supper wasn't in the bible, but that the artistic depiction of that event, "The Last Supper", isn't a part of the Christian religion. It is a painting.
I think religion is hogwash but criticizing a famous depiction of an event that happened in the Bible because it's not actually being part of the Bible strikes me as desperate.
Nah. It's something they don't get bent out of shape for for any other religious artwork. Like nobody is up in arms about the memes of that shitty restoration of the picture of Jesus
There's plenty of satirical art/speech/expression about Christianity and people don't go through life being enraged at all of it until they're told to have that opinion by media.
Plus, from what I understand, the only "sacrilegious" element was that there were drag performers doing it? There's not even anything inherently anti-christian there except in that wearing the other gender's clothing is prohibited in like 3 verses. But again, people aren't typically upset by the identity of the author except in this case. Christians are only so vehemently anti-drag in the US because of media spoon feeding them opinions.
Other examples they dont get mad about
Or infinitely many others including ones with RuPaul, futurama, rick and morty, marvel, the charmin bears, pretty much any IP you can name has a version of this somebody made of it that is equally "sacrilegious".
I'm not defending their anti drag position, it is ridiculous.
But they find drag to be an affront to their beliefs, and thus them making fun of the last supper is offensive in this case (it isn't making fun of it, which I just learned, I'm speaking hypothetically here) and maybe not when it is referenced humorously in others.
It's like some white person getting up on stage and doing jokes about living fried chicken and watermelon. Maybe some people are mildly put off by it but most would just think it dumb. But put that white guy in black face and all of a sudden it's a lot more offensive. I'm not equating these two, just pointing out how context matters.
But I'm not even sure why that matters here because the statement was that it really isn't part of the bible, when it's clearly depicting a major moment in the Bible.
Not true, you were defending their anti drag position. Still am, a little because you don't understand how to back down
It's possible to understand that something offends a person, and think it wrong to intentionally offend them, and at the same time find it ridiculous that it does.
With severe cognitive dissonance anything is possible
Agreed. But, of course, this is a projection.
It's a painting of a scene from the Bible, though
A painting by a homosexual naturalist scientist that constantly gets co-opted by the church. Religious folk are so ridiculous on what you choose to get your feathers ruffled over. It's just a stupid painting that he made to experiment with new materials for fresco murals.
They weren't saying the event called the last supper wasn't in the bible, but that the artistic depiction of that event, "The Last Supper", isn't a part of the Christian religion. It is a painting.
I think religion is hogwash but criticizing a famous depiction of an event that happened in the Bible because it's not actually being part of the Bible strikes me as desperate.
Nah. It's something they don't get bent out of shape for for any other religious artwork. Like nobody is up in arms about the memes of that shitty restoration of the picture of Jesus
There's plenty of satirical art/speech/expression about Christianity and people don't go through life being enraged at all of it until they're told to have that opinion by media.
Plus, from what I understand, the only "sacrilegious" element was that there were drag performers doing it? There's not even anything inherently anti-christian there except in that wearing the other gender's clothing is prohibited in like 3 verses. But again, people aren't typically upset by the identity of the author except in this case. Christians are only so vehemently anti-drag in the US because of media spoon feeding them opinions.
Other examples they dont get mad about
Or infinitely many others including ones with RuPaul, futurama, rick and morty, marvel, the charmin bears, pretty much any IP you can name has a version of this somebody made of it that is equally "sacrilegious".
I'm not defending their anti drag position, it is ridiculous.
But they find drag to be an affront to their beliefs, and thus them making fun of the last supper is offensive in this case (it isn't making fun of it, which I just learned, I'm speaking hypothetically here) and maybe not when it is referenced humorously in others.
It's like some white person getting up on stage and doing jokes about living fried chicken and watermelon. Maybe some people are mildly put off by it but most would just think it dumb. But put that white guy in black face and all of a sudden it's a lot more offensive. I'm not equating these two, just pointing out how context matters.
But I'm not even sure why that matters here because the statement was that it really isn't part of the bible, when it's clearly depicting a major moment in the Bible.
Not true, you were defending their anti drag position. Still am, a little because you don't understand how to back down
It's possible to understand that something offends a person, and think it wrong to intentionally offend them, and at the same time find it ridiculous that it does.
With severe cognitive dissonance anything is possible
Agreed. But, of course, this is a projection.
It's a painting of a scene from the Bible, though
A painting by a homosexual naturalist scientist that constantly gets co-opted by the church. Religious folk are so ridiculous on what you choose to get your feathers ruffled over. It's just a stupid painting that he made to experiment with new materials for fresco murals.