Calm Posted June 1, 2017 Author Posted June 1, 2017 7 minutes ago, CV75 said: I think the Gospel supplies us with the spiritual tools to “hash” or “#” (pound)..... I am in mortal pain from the punning.
pogi Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 While I agree that the church would do good to include Mormon art from a variety of cultural perspectives, I don't view our current art work as "racist" by any means. It is reflective of the culture of the headquarters of the church which is predominantly white and European. Unless it was intentionally sanctioned for racist purposes, I think it is nothing more than a reflection of the predominant culture at Church headquarters. If Joseph Smith was born Indian with the headquarters established in India, I suspect that the nativity might look something like this: And if if in Korea, maybe something like this: And if in Africa: I wouldn't consider these pieces of art racist, but simply reflective of the culture of the artist or sanctioning body. Again, I think the church would do good to diversify the cultural influence of their sanctioned art as we are a world-wide church, but I don't see it as racism. If anything, they are guilty of being naturally influenced by and favoring their own cultural norms and backgrounds. Our art work is bad enough, what we don't want is for Mormon art to turn into something like JW art, which is overtly PC and cheesy as hell: I like cultural flair in art work, I don't think we should attempt to have neutral cultural influence like the JW's, but simply to have more and varying cultures represented in our artwork. 2
Darren10 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Calm said: Hopefully there are very, very few. Agreed. Very vile and disgusting.
The Nehor Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 7 minutes ago, CV75 said: I think "appreciating diversity" is one way to address problems with racism. I like diversity but have come to dislike the term "appreciate (or appreciating) diversity". Too often it elevates differences as being virtues simply because it is a difference and children, teens, and fools (probably the largest of the three groups) imagine they become interesting and appreciable by trying to be as different as possible even in ways they have no real interest or enthusiasm for and instead become insufferable. 2
clarkgoble Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 I don't like appreciating diversity for it's own sake either. To me it's espouses a goal where the main value is novelty and I just disagree with that. However I think we have to be inclusive to members because that's our duty as Saints. To the degree that's not happening (and it's clearly not) then we're failing in our basic duty of fellowshipping. 3
bluebell Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 4 hours ago, clarkgoble said: Popular Science did an interesting article on what Jesus likely looked like. I think what makes it hard to picture Jesus is that He didn't have a Jewish father. We know from scripture that he didn't stand out in looks so He had to have looked similar to everyone else to a large extent, but what that means exactly is hard to guess.
Storm Rider Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 The topic of racism comes around ad nauseum in society and I do intend to ignore most of it. How do you stamp out the evil heart? If you know the solution and it works you will make trillions of dollars. It reminds me of "hate" crimes as if knowing that you don't like a person for a specific reasons is somehow worse than just killing you for no good reason. Hate and feelings that go hand in hand with hate motivate all crimes; why is a hate crime somehow worse? People hate, dislike, don't enjoy, (you choose) others for a wide range of reasons. You don't like fat people; you don't like stupid people; you don't like bald people; the list is endless. I personally reject all of the many ways humans belittle and/or exclude others. If you think racism is the worst of the lot - okay. But when you have exterminated racism please get on with exterminating every other way also. The only answer I know is to preach, teach, and follow the Savior.
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 2 hours ago, The Nehor said: I like diversity but have come to dislike the term "appreciate (or appreciating) diversity". Too often it elevates differences as being virtues simply because it is a difference and children, teens, and fools (probably the largest of the three groups) imagine they become interesting and appreciable by trying to be as different as possible even in ways they have no real interest or enthusiasm for and instead become insufferable. I agree; I mean it in #TheMostDivineSense and as discussed by our leaders in #General Conference in the past 15 years or so. I think that functional diversity promotes love and unity in Christ. I think the imagery of Ephesians 4:16 addresses the diversity that is essential to achieve oneness. Verses 15-17: “But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind…” The whole of 1 Corinthians chapter 12 teaches the same thing; I like verse #25 where it shows that this kind of diversity is not prone to schism.
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 6 hours ago, clarkgoble said: Popular Science did an interesting article on what Jesus likely looked like. Considering the neckline, I think this rendering looks more like John the Baptist. 3
The Nehor Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 14 minutes ago, CV75 said: Considering the neckline, I think this rendering looks more like John the Baptist. Okay, that was good.
The Nehor Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 18 minutes ago, CV75 said: I agree; I mean it in #TheMostDivineSense and as discussed by our leaders in #General Conference in the past 15 years or so. I think that functional diversity promotes love and unity in Christ. I think the imagery of Ephesians 4:16 addresses the diversity that is essential to achieve oneness. Verses 15-17: “But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind…” The whole of 1 Corinthians chapter 12 teaches the same thing; I like verse #25 where it shows that this kind of diversity is not prone to schism. Yeah, I find uniqueness is best found it surrendering to Christ. You in essence give him your personality and he gives it back a hundredfold. 2
Garden Girl Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 21 hours ago, Calm said: If we continue to portray him as European, why not portray him as Indian or African as it would be just as accurate, imo. Why don't we simply portray Jesus as the person he was, a Jew, growing up, living in, and ministering in the Holy Land... GG 2
Rajah Manchou Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 14 hours ago, RevTestament said: I think an effort to be realistic would be appreciated, and would alleviate the feelings that the Church may still be racist. While as I have already noted we may not know exactly how Jesus looked 2000 years ago, I think it fair to say He did not look European, and it is doubtful that all Semites had black hair bred into them later. Pretty funny to consider that Jesus was probably very out of place amongst those fair and delightsome Nephites as they are often portrayed. 1
Rajah Manchou Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) And since someone mentioned Del Parsons Edited June 2, 2017 by Rajah Manchou 2
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 11 hours ago, The Nehor said: Yeah, I find uniqueness is best found it surrendering to Christ. You in essence give him your personality and he gives it back a hundredfold. Amen, in which there is no place for racism.
RevTestament Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 4 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said: Pretty funny to consider that Jesus was probably very out of place amongst those fair and delightsome Nephites as they are often portrayed. Well, I think this was the point of Calm's OP. It is not overtly racist, but essentially much if not all the "Official" Church art depicts Gentiles - as Nephites or Jews in the Holy Land. If you are going to do that, why not depict blacks, Native Americans, Asians, etc? It would be no less accurate. I think it was done out of custom because the Church started as primarily Gentile, and just has never changed. However, depicting a Gentile Jesus in Jerusalem with Gentile children doesn't do anything for me - other than kind of irk me - I've complained to my poor wife about it for years, but obviously it sells. One would think Yeshua came to the Gentiles. The point of Church art should not be to sell. It should promote the call of the Book of Mormon to all peoples - not just European Gentiles. "Fair and delightsome" Nephites would have looked very Semite, but could be depicted with fair and delightsome countenances. At least the above picture doesn't have Romanesque clothing. I believe the Lamanites also received the gospel. Church art would be a great opportunity to better witness to the Native American members - instead it's Gentiles again. The great stone Mayan temples also irk me - they were temples of human sacrifice. They are completely out of sync with the Book of Mormon, but they are what has withstood the test of time, so they get depicted. In reality Nephite Temples were 3 part structures - much like the Hebrew temple - with an outer court. 1
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 On 6/1/2017 at 2:14 AM, Calm said: We need to recognize that racism still exists, imo Acknowledging the efforts, practicalities and potentials you’ve listed here, I’m wondering how this discussion might be playing out in the ward, stake and general councils in terms of the best methods and media to use in bringing people within their ministry to Christ. Does anyone have any experience with that? I suspect method-wise (such as members personalizing the prophetic/apostolic priorities) are universal/global in application, but with respect to media and its content (with artistic and story-telling media seeming to be emphasized in this thread), I’m wondering about the weight of cultural customization in getting people’s attention in order to share the Spirit. I'm thinking that media and content would need to somehow convey the Spirit of our message, but then again, the Spirit often helps a person overcome his personal preferences, cultural leanings and even deep prejudices to hear the Word from an unlikely source. I'm reminded of having a negative visceral reaction to an illustration in a Church publication, yet later in life relied on the content of that same publication to guide me spiritually.
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Well, I think this was the point of Calm's OP. It is not overtly racist, but essentially much if not all the "Official" Church art depicts Gentiles - as Nephites or Jews in the Holy Land. Now this in interesting in that the Gospel was to be restored first through the nations of the Gentiles and then to the Jews.
bluebell Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I hope that woman isn't allowed to continue to be the face of mormon racism and remain in good standing in the church. 3
RevTestament Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, CV75 said: Now this in interesting in that the Gospel was to be restored first through the nations of the Gentiles and then to the Jews. So Gentiles should stick themselves in Galilee and the Nephite promised land? Or are you saying that our art should depict "Jews" or Hebrews, in an effort to promote the gospel to them? I think the latter does make sense. However, the gospel will continue to spread throughout the world to all peoples, so I think some art depicting this would also make sense. After all, this is the call of the Church: 2 Nephi 26:33 33 For none of these iniquities come of the Lord; for he doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and he ainviteth them ball to ccome unto him and partake of his goodness; and he ddenieth none that come unto him, black and white, ebond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the fheathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.
RevTestament Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, bluebell said: I hope that woman isn't allowed to continue to be the face of mormon racism and remain in good standing in the church. I don't believe the sin of racism should affect one's standing in the Church. That would lead to questions like: "Are you racist?" It's another sin people just need to learn to overcome.
thesometimesaint Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 When we become members of the Church we are no longer Gentiles. We are the Children of Israel. 1
CV75 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 55 minutes ago, RevTestament said: So Gentiles should stick themselves in Galilee and the Nephite promised land? Or are you saying that our art should depict "Jews" or Hebrews, in an effort to promote the gospel to them? I think the latter does make sense. However, the gospel will continue to spread throughout the world to all peoples, so I think some art depicting this would also make sense. After all, this is the call of the Church: 2 Nephi 26:33 33 For none of these iniquities come of the Lord; for he doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and he ainviteth them ball to ccome unto him and partake of his goodness; and he ddenieth none that come unto him, black and white, ebond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the fheathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile. It is interesting because I’m wondering how this discussion might be playing out in the ward, stake and general councils in terms of the best methods and media to use in bringing people within their ministry to Christ. I suspect method-wise (such as members personalizing the prophetic/apostolic priorities) are universal/global in application, but with respect to media and its content (with artistic and story-telling media seeming to be emphasized in this thread), I’m wondering about the weight of cultural customization in getting people’s attention in order to share the Spirit. Your comment was interesting, because the pre-Restoration artwork is of Gentile nation origin/culture/tradition, and was later appropriated by the LDS Church, the Church being the fulfillment of Book of Mormon prophecy (a book originating from a remnant of the covenant people) that the Restoration would come forth through the Gentiles. And then we have other revelations about this order in terms of the last (Gentiles) shall be first and the first (Jews) shall be last in the roll-out of the dispensation of the fullness of times. It is interesting that the artwork would reflect the cultures through which the Gospel was to be restored, and inasmuch as it is a vehicle for preaching it, also reflects the Gentile target audience first. The Church art contests are worldwide, and these too are vehicles of Gentile nations’ cultures being leveraged to share the Gospel. I’m not saying what should happen, or what should be imposed upon us, but that these things seem to evolve in the promulgation of the Gospel among the nations of the earth, especially as they follow a prophesied order, presumably in alignment with the Lord’s will, and as the artists are creating under the influence of the Spirit and also the more noble aspects of their culture, which is certainly to be appreciated. I'm thinking that media and content would need to somehow convey the Spirit of our message, but then again, the Spirit often helps a person overcome his personal preferences, cultural leanings and even deep prejudices to hear the Word from an unlikely source. I'm reminded of having a negative visceral reaction to an illustration in a Church publication, yet later in life relied on the content of that same publication to guide me spiritually. 1
clarkgoble Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 16 hours ago, bluebell said: I think what makes it hard to picture Jesus is that He didn't have a Jewish father. We know from scripture that he didn't stand out in looks so He had to have looked similar to everyone else to a large extent, but what that means exactly is hard to guess. I don't think you'd know exactly. But almost certainly he'd have looked within the range of appearance for 1st century Palestinian Jews and not the more Irish looking figure we have in most contemporary art.
Calm Posted June 2, 2017 Author Posted June 2, 2017 2 hours ago, RevTestament said: However, depicting a Gentile Jesus in Jerusalem with Gentile children doesn't do anything for me - other than kind of irk me - I've complained to my poor wife about it for years, but obviously it sells. Greg Christensen was the number one Christian (not just LDS) artist in Canada back around 2002. It is definitely a larger cultural habit.
Recommended Posts