New Church Logo of Jesus in a Bell Jar?

[Shulem]

The Church thinks much like a corporation which runs a business in order to put 100 billion dollars into a secret bank account which members (including my former self) had donated for what was suppose to be a good cause to include charity and relief.

But, the corporate leaders of Mormonism think like a business and we see this in the new Church logo which does nothing to inspire and lift my soul. It's like a lifeless piece of ice floating in the depths of the sea or a cold asteroid sailing evermore through space. The blue Mormon Jesus is a cold depiction of what is suppose to be light and celestial sunshine. The sooner the Church gets rid of this logo the better off it will be. Get rid of the logo, replace it with something bright and warm, and pull out the bulk of that 100 billion dollars and donate it to charity! That is what Jesus would do.

Isn't that right, Jesus?

"Yes, that's right!"

[Shulem]

Oh, come on guys, you know I don't like cameras.

Jesus gave every penny he had to help the poor and the needy.

Now that's the Jesus everyone loves!

[Shulem]

I can't believe the Church wants a new logo of me as a statue, a graven image.

The Christus statue is definitely not my favorite.

Hang in there, Jesus. Hopefully, the new logo won't last long.

I wonder how different the logo would be if the Church had made it a public option wherein a host of options were available and church members could vote on which one they wanted for their logo rather than having to rely on the personal taste of the Church President and other board members who run the Church?

Why not leave it to the members to decide something for a change? Let the members think for themselves and express their wishes.

[Shulem]

Someone might ask: "Why didn't the Church get it right the first time?"

It could be argued that if it's really Christ's church then he would have directed his prophet to have his name written in the appropriate format the first time around rather than having to change it later to emphasize the Lord's name by increasing the size of the font. Obviously, when the first logo was established, Church leaders neglected to adopt the idea to emphasize Jesus's name. Apparently, the Spirit didn't inspire or command his Church to emphasize his name in that manner.

So, who is to say the latest version is not the best reflection of what Christ really wants? Maybe it too falls short of what Christ wants and nobody has yet thought of a better idea or the Spirit remains silent on this issue. Could it be that both logos are man made ideas and Jesus never said a word about it?

The name Jesus Christ doesn't receive tremendous emphasis in the Salt Lake Temple plaque, of all places. Not even in gold leaf is the name much larger than CHURCH or SAINTS. It appears that LORD is the chief operative word at play. In this case the title of the person receives greater emphasis then the actual name of the person.

[Shulem]

Someone might ask: "Why didn't the Church get it right the first time?"

It could be argued that if it's really Christ's church then he would have directed his prophet to have his name written in the appropriate format the first time around rather than having to change it later to emphasize the Lord's name by increasing the size of the font. Obviously, when the first logo was established, Church leaders neglected to adopt the idea to emphasize Jesus's name. Apparently, the Spirit didn't inspire or command his Church to emphasize his name in that manner.

Interesting to note that the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve met in the temple to approve the new logo design for the Church name in 1974:

The final design was laid out in a high-level meeting with the LDS First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the temple, recalled Smith, who was enlisted to help with the multi-media presentation.

The Salt Lake Tribune

This design featuring the name of Jesus Christ in common sized letters lasted until 1995 when the Church finally decided that they needed to emphasize the name of Jesus Christ. Where was the Spirit of the Lord in 1974 when they got it wrong the first time? It took 21 years for the Spirit to finally whisper into the ears of the prophets that the logo did not maintain the highest standard and failed to represent Christ's name in an appropriate fashion. How can it be said that Christ was pleased when the 1974 design was first released? If anything, the Lord was not pleased and it took 21 years for the Church to realize that.

[Shulem]

Too me, he looks a bit like a drunken bum, waddling about, and having to balance himself lest he falls. I'm afraid he appears lewd, very unkept, and in a drunken state looks like he's chasing and corralling women while patronizing a wild saloon. The man just looks dirty and could use a bath and a clean shave.

Right?



Just look, his robe is fallen open -- very sloppy looking. It looks like tatters dangling at his foot. Really bad.

Most of all, I notice his nipple is exposed. Wow. Generally, exposing the nipple in this fashion is either crude or lewd if not a prelude to nudity -- shockingly, perhaps pornography?

The robe reminds me of a roll of toilet paper shredded by a cat.

Note that the bottom of the robe looks like it's been ripped, tattered, and pulled!




Stop pulling on my robe!

[Shulem]

Here we see Jesus comes out of his jar with new life and purpose and seems to be standing aloof in the natural clouds rather than being sliced through with razor sharp lines in the other design. The diagonal lines from the other logos intrude upon the very space of Christ's body and carve up the space behind him in an unnatural setting. One of those diagonal lines is like a laser beam cutting through the back of the skull. In any case, the line is an intrusion and should be removed.




Notice how the diagonal line cuts into the neck, this is terrible design:



This is what comes to mind when I look at the diagonal lines behind Jesus and the one that seems to smack him across the back of the head:



The diagonal line running through Christ's neck needs to be removed. The line is inappropriate and should not make contact with the face or head of a Divine Being. The Church has made a terrible mistake in doing this. It needs to be cut from the logo, STAT.



Chop out the line, not the neck! It gives me the chills.

[Ramus_Stein]

Here's a pretty good version:

[Shulem]

Ramus_Stein,

The Jesus you shared is warm and arouses emotion and deep thought. It proffers a sense of protection and seems to symbolize health and well being. It certainly is more interesting than the cold stone Christus. Note that he has a single nipple showing just like the Mormon Christus has a nipple showing as he seems to flutter about in a loose bedsheet -- stumbling about like a drunken man.

More will be discussed regarding the nipple. This needs to be done in a respectful manner and abide by the spirit of the celestial forum. This thread needs to stay in the celestial forum and not get tossed below into terrestrial. Let's not cast our pearls before swine.

[Shulem]

Too me, he looks a bit like a drunken bum, waddling about, and having to balance himself lest he falls. I'm afraid he appears lewd, very unkept, and in a drunken state looks like he's chasing and corralling women while patronizing a wild saloon. The man just looks dirty and could use a bath and a clean shave.

People walk past the Hyde Park Chapel in London and pay little mind to Mormon Christus as he beckons folks from the corner of a window.



Seriously, the Christus gives the illusion of a staggering drunk man in a window.

The knotted hair looks awful.



Don't fall!