Oh sorry no he still supports Mormons trying to tell the entire world how it should refer to Mormons. He’s just against a large percentage of Muslims trying to tell the West how it wants Islam to be portrayed.“DP” wrote:It is true that the Islamic artistic tradition has devoted far more attention to calligraphy and to more or less abstract representations than to, say, landscape painting or other forms familiar in the West. It has tended to shy away from portraiture, and especially from portraying saints and prophets. In particular, there has been, in many circles, a reluctance to depict the Prophet Muhammad. You will, so far as I’m aware — and I’ve been in more mosques than I can count — never, ever, see a portrait of Muhammad in a mosque, and certainly not in the specific space set aside for worship. Moreover, there are absolutely no “illustrated Qur’ans” in the manner of the illustrated Bibles, for both children and adults, with which many of us are well acquainted. Even when the Prophet is depicted, it is not uncommon for his general bodily form to be indicated while, at the same time, his face is either left blank or covered with a cloth veil. There is a real fear among many Muslims, both historically and still today, of falling into idolatry.
Today, extreme sects of Sunni Islam — e.g., the Wahhabis of the Arabian Peninsula — are vociferous in their opposition to visual representations of the Prophet Muhammad. But, although they would fain claim that they speak for Islam as a whole, they don’t. And it seems inappropriate, to say the least, for the administration at an American university to give those extreme sects veto power over how Islam should be depicted and portrayed in the West.
Has anyone checked with the Community of Christ to see if they are ok with the LDS church constantly claiming they speak for Mormonism?
