tonie Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 A picture of a winged Angel is the imgae that accompanies the First Presidency Message.
Danzo Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 A picture of a winged Angel is the imgae that accompanies the First Presidency Message. Point?
Popular Post pogi Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Posted March 3, 2015 That is a beautiful painting. That's all I have to say about that. 6
tonie Posted March 3, 2015 Author Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Point? Ensign, December 2011, page 54. The Angels in the Ensign article do not have wings, the Angels in the original painting have wings. The paint is title The Resurrection, by Carl Heinrich Block Edited March 3, 2015 by tonie
tonie Posted March 3, 2015 Author Posted March 3, 2015 That is a beautiful painting. That's all I have to say about that. Yes it is. 1
Danzo Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Ensign, December 2011, page 54. The Angels in the Ensign article do not have wings, the Angels in the original painting have wings. The paint is title The Resurrection, by Carl Heinrich Block Just proves there is no hive mind at the church . One graphic designer thinks one way, another thinks another way.
Robert F. Smith Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Ensign, December 2011, page 54. The Angels in the Ensign article do not have wings, the Angels in the original painting have wings. The paint is title The Resurrection, by Carl Heinrich BlockBloch (1834-1890 Denmark) is highly regarded among Mormons here in Utah Valley, and they had a showing of his artwork at the BYU Museum of Art in recent years. People hereabouts wouldn't stop talking about his work. I don't believe that he was Mormon. Edited March 3, 2015 by Robert F. Smith
Popular Post KevinG Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Posted March 3, 2015 I'm taking odds on how long it takes this thread to get to a discussion about portraying Joseph translating with head in hat. 10
Popular Post SeekingUnderstanding Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Posted March 3, 2015 I'm taking odds on how long it takes this thread to get to a discussion about portraying Joseph translating with head in hat.My guess is post number 10. 5
Popular Post Garden Girl Posted March 3, 2015 Popular Post Posted March 3, 2015 Ensign, December 2011, page 54. The Angels in the Ensign article do not have wings, the Angels in the original painting have wings. The paint is title The Resurrection, by Carl Heinrich Block If I remember correctly... there was no end of criticism leveled because apparently the wings were deleted for the Ensign artricle... so now a painting is left intact because of it's beauty, and again there is criticism... darned if we do, darned if we don't... GG 5
haggard Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 I'm taking odds on how long it takes this thread to get to a discussion about portraying Joseph translating with head in hat.Joseph translated the plates in a hat?....not following you.
Storm Rider Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Those Mormons are not to be trusted. They use the same words, but mean different things. For example, they teach that angels don't have wings, but see right here they show that angels do have wings. You just cannot trust these people. Be very careful with them. Make them define exactly what they mean when they say something. AND they are still not Christian. All that talk about Jesus is about a different Jesus.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 If I remember correctly... there was no end of criticism leveled because apparently the wings were deleted for the Ensign artricle... so now a painting is left intact because of it's beauty, and again there is criticism... darned if we do, darned if we don't... GGWho criticized anyone?? 1
Tacenda Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) If I remember correctly... there was no end of criticism leveled because apparently the wings were deleted for the Ensign artricle... so now a painting is left intact because of it's beauty, and again there is criticism... darned if we do, darned if we don't... GGI think the church learned it's lesson. Naw, but do think enough backlash got back to the PR dept perhaps. As well it should. Edited March 3, 2015 by Tacenda
Garden Girl Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Who criticized anyone?? Hello Seeking...IIRC it was some of the non-LDS here on the board... criticized that we took it upon ourselves to alter a painting... quite frankly, though this is a beautiful painting, and I can appreciate it as such... part of me doesn't like it because of the wings... EDIT to Add: Incidentally, one of my favorite movies stars John Travolta as an angel with wings... "Michael." In the movie one of the best scenes is when Michael is asked to bring a little dog back to life (after it was hit by a truck)... and as Michael stood holding the dog gently, looking up to the heavens, he spreads his wings and they were beautiful.But the idea that angels need wings to "fly" never has seen right to me... GG Edited March 3, 2015 by Garden Girl
pogi Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Hello Seeking...IIRC it was some of the non-LDS here on the board... criticized that we took it upon ourselves to alter a painting... quite frankly, though this is a beautiful painting, and I can appreciate it as such... part of me doesn't like it because of the wings... GG Don't listen to that part of you that doesn't like it. Art is all about symbolism ,as scripture is also. The wings make this painting in my opinion. Just as we take refuge under the saviors wings, this painting represents (in my mind) the savior taking refuge under the wings of an administering angel in his time of need. I think it is absolutely beautiful. Wings are used as symbolism all throughout scripture. I paraphrase - those who wait for the Lord will receive strength and have wings like eagles. I think it is an appropriate depiction for angels to have wings, it gives them a freedom beyond mortality that would be difficult to depict any other way. Edited March 3, 2015 by pogi 2
SeekingUnderstanding Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Hello Seeking...IIRC it was some of the non-LDS here on the board... criticized that we took it upon ourselves to alter a painting... quite frankly, though this is a beautiful painting, and I can appreciate it as such... part of me doesn't like it because of the wings... EDIT to Add: Incidentally, one of my favorite movies stars John Travolta as an angel with wings... "Michael." In the movie one of the best scenes is when Michael is asked to bring a little dog back to life (after it was hit by a truck)... and as Michael stood holding the dog gently, looking up to the heavens, he spreads his wings and they were beautiful.But the idea that angels need wings to "fly" never has seen right to me... GGI reread my post and realize I was unclear (sorry!). I recall the original criticism. What I am not aware of is anyone criticizing the decision to leave wings on this beautiful picture which you seemed to imply when you said: "so now a painting is left intact because of it's beauty, and again there is criticism" Edited March 3, 2015 by SeekingUnderstanding
coolrok7 Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Reading letters of light with his face in a hat is how the BofM got here, the "plates" not necessarily being there. True?
Garden Girl Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Don't listen to that part of you that doesn't like it. Art is all about symbolism ,as scripture is also. The wings make this painting in my opinion. Just as we take refuge under the saviors wings, this painting represents (in my mind) the savior taking refuge under the wings of an administering angel in his time of need. I think it is absolutely beautiful. Wings are used as symbolism all throughout scripture. I paraphrase - those who wait for the Lord will receive strength and have wings like eagles. I think it is an appropriate depiction for angels to have wings, it gives them a freedom beyond mortality that would be difficult to depict any other way. Thank you pogi... I can see the symbolism... one of my favorite scriptures is Matt 23:37... about the mother hen who gathers her chickens under her wings... and I like the image of the wings of eagles... GG 2
ERayR Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Ensign, December 2011, page 54. The Angels in the Ensign article do not have wings, the Angels in the original painting have wings. The paint is title The Resurrection, by Carl Heinrich Block So you have just proven the Church to be false/not true. Boy you have finally convinced me. Not. Petty nit picking. 1
ERayR Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Just proves there is no hive mind at the church . One graphic designer thinks one way, another thinks another way. And the only ones who are concerned is the critics. 1
JLHPROF Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Reading letters of light with his face in a hat is how the BofM got here, the "plates" not necessarily being there. True? Sure, that too. Who cares? It makes no difference to the finished product or to its source. And this topic is a total derail. Edited March 3, 2015 by JLHPROF
pogi Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Joseph translated the plates in a hat?....not following you. Reading letters of light with his face in a hat is how the BofM got here, the "plates" not necessarily being there. True? Now look what you've done KevinG! 3
Recommended Posts