Jesus in a Bell Jar

[_Shulem]

The new logo may appeal to those who need cleaner hair?



If it's good enough for Jesus it's good enough for you!

[Guest]

Jesus's robe reminds me of a roll of TP shredded by a cat.

The bottom of Christ's robe looks like it's been ripped, tattered, and pulled!

[_Shulem]

3 Key Aspects of the New Church Symbol, Its Purpose, and Use

Depicting Christ under an arch serves as a reminder of His emergence from the tomb three days after His death.

A reminder? Who needs to be reminded that Jesus supposedly rose from the dead after 3 days? What's with the reminder? Nobody needs to be reminded of that -- everyone already knows that, moreover, especially Christians! So why do Mormons need to be reminded about this by a new Church logo? What about all the Mormons who have since passed on and didn't get this little reminder in a Church Logo? Does that make them less Christian than the Mormons are today? Why couldn't they have a fancy new logo too?

This business of reminding Mormons that Christ rose from the tomb in the logo is grade school stuff -- reminds me of being in kindergarten and treated like a child. I think that's how the Church treats its members, like a bunch of little children who can't think for themselves and have to be reminded that Jesus rose from the dead.

I'm so glad I'm no longer a Mormon. They treat their people like little kids. I so hated that.

:rolleyes:

[_Shulem]

This seems rather disrespectful if you ask me. Breathing Corona through Jesus seems like a sick way to represent the new Church Logo.

I wonder if using masks will become standard issue for attending the temple and performing ordinances in close quarters with so many people?

[_Shulem]

Depicting Christ under an arch serves as a reminder of His emergence from the tomb three days after His death.

Was the idea that the arch "serves as a reminder" conceived by the artist prior to designing the logo or after? Why do I ask? Well, because if it was after then that means the Church is just making it up as it goes along trying to paint a picture after the fact while all along acting like it's an inspirational piece of work composed with purpose and intent in creating the original message of a reminder.

I think the design of the arch is sterile. It should be jagged and somewhat irregular as any tomb wall entrance would be. The use of a perfect arch representing an earthly tomb wall is unnatural and the lack of definition of simple contour and shading to create the appearance of stone makes the whole thing appear sterile. The perfect curve and shape of the line looks like it was made by a machine rather than a human hand depicting an actual tomb entrance. In other words, it looks FAKE and the intent to make it represent resurrection seems like an afterthought rather than the original idea and purpose.

I think the new Church logo is a huge failure and should be scrapped. The image of Christ in sketch form copied from an actual stone statue does not go well with the stark contrast of the curved line which encloses the trapped Person. The whole thing is just a sad looking work of art. It looks depressing and somewhat creepy. But it fits well with what you get with Mormonism because you have to cough up 10% of your income and do what ever the Church leaders tell you to do. That's creepy and matches well with the new Church logo.

[Guest]

I mentioned earlier that the shades of blue that consists of all of the color apart from the statue itself other than its shade lines makes the whole thing rather boring and like a corporate logo rather than a religious concept that is supposed to transcend the normal business of earth life.

Where is the YELLOW? Why no orange? Dare to use red! Why no warmth from the logo? It's cold and lifeless! The coldness and sterile design of the the new Church logo is a total flop. It won't last long on the Church books. It's coldness is uninviting. The impression it radiates does not look inviting nor does it soothe and warm the senses. It's a cold and lifeless drawing of a statue. A total failure in inspiring and lifting the feelings of the heart and mind.

I don't like it. Get rid of it. It's uninspired.

[_Shulem]

And now, without further ado, I wish to express an important concept endorsed by the Mormons in representing their favorite statuette of Jesus. Mormons believe that both the Father and Son are resurrected and glorified men having perfected bodies of flesh and bone. Nobody wants to be fat and ugly. Nobody wants flab hanging off their belly. Everyone wants to look down and see what's below their waistline. Right? It's no fun being fat and not seeing what you got (or don't have) below. Sorry, I digress . . . .

Now, you'll note, carefully, Jesus Christ is not depicted as a man having chest hair. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing amiss about a mature male not having chest hair -- nothing at all. But, I have to think that IF the Mormons depicting their version of a statuette of Heavenly Father being shirtless there would most assuredly be some chest hair at least about his nipple, likely much more than just that. But Mormon Jesus in the logo is hairless -- completely hairless about the chest. Yet, Man-God (Father) would have hair. So what does this imply? It points to the fact that Mormons regard the Son of God as just that, a son, a boy, someone who someday will become a real man like his Father. But in the meantime Jesus will simply have to eat more green beans.

Oh the weirdness of Mormonism. I'm so glad to be out of that religion.

[_Shulem]

To be honest, I fail to see the grandeur in Mormon Jesus standing under the tomb arch. Too me, he looks like a drunken bum, waddling about, and begging for his next drink. I find the expression of Mormon Jesus in the new Church logo to be a double standard in which the Church is presenting a lewd image of someone who is drunk and perhaps looking for women among the bars and taverns in which he resides. He looks drunk and incoherent. He looks dirty and even dangerous. I wouldn't give him a dime and I certainly wouldn't take him in. If that man approached me, I'd call the police; have him arrested. Looks can be deceiving but he looks like someone who has lost all sense of decency and is capable of molesting a victim of his choosing. That certainly won't be me. I'm out of there!

Frankly, he's gross and unkept. He looks like he needs rehabilitation.

[_Shulem]

Mormons pride themselves on their so-called focus on the resurrection and less so on the gruesome cross, albeit the Mormons do acknowledge the cross in their artwork. But the cross is specific to a time and place prior to the resurrection so the marks on the hands and feet that Mormons love to depict in resurrected Christ, IN EVERY WORK OF ART, are gruesome in their own right. There is simply no need for that. A glorified resurrected body according to Mormon theology is not going to be marred or disfigured in any way. It is whole and complete -- perfect. Therefore, the constant depiction of Christ Jesus having wounds as depicted in typical Mormon art are counterproductive in arguing for a perfect resurrection because although it's viewed as a sign of faith through assurance that the Person really is Christ crucified, it makes a mockery of the perfection of a resurrected and glorified body. The body can't be viewed as perfect when it has scars and wounds. There is no need to be reminded of a crucifixion by displaying scars and wounds on the hands and feet of Christ in Mormon artwork. It's all fake. It's not real. Those so-called wounds are NOT really there anyway, it's all in the imagination, the pretended belief of the one who see them in order to remind themselves that, yes, this really is Jesus crucified, therefore, I believe.

It's time for the Mormons to grow up and face reality. There is no need to be reminded. Either you believe in Christ crucified or you don't. The cross was long ago. The crucifixion ended 2000 years ago. Get rid of the scars and believe for beliefs sake. Believe in a perfect resurrection -- in one which glorifies the human body, not mar it with painful reminders of torture and execution!

[_Shulem]

If I was the Savior of the world having been crucified on a cross by cruel torture and inhuman acts such as told in the Bible, and afterward resurrected, I would not NOT appear to others having scars or wounds in my hands and feet. I find that to be repugnant and barbaric. My hands and feet would be resurrected in glory and nobody, including myself, need be reminded about nails being driven into my mortal flesh and left to hang on a cross until dead.

I would appear in glory in a resurrection of joy and all sorrow of the cross would be in the past. My hands and feet would be perfect and that is how others would view them too. Look at me. I am the Savior, believe in me and be ye saved!

But, I'm not Mormon Jesus and neither do I believe in the resurrection which is a religious fantasy made up by biblical writers who invented religion according to their own fantasies and desires.