Iconia is a blog about religion and art by Menachem Wecker.
Contact:
E-mail/AIM
Iconia is part of the
Canonist network of religion blogs.
Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr., is “The Infidel Guy,” with a webcast at infidelguy.com, now thedebatehour.com.
Finley graduated the Atlanta Broadcast Institute, where he received his broadcast certification in 2003. He has founded FreethoughtMedia.com, AtheistForums.com, faithandfreethought.com and over 12 other websites. Reggie is also co-founder of The Atheist Network, which “fosters a growing community of atheists.” He told Iconia about Jesus speaking Internet-speak and of wearing a bullet-pierced statuette of JFK around his neck.
MW: How do you respond to the argument that religion is not an entirely bankrupt operation, because of the religious art made in its name? Is there anything to be said for the fact that our canon would be empty of the likes of Michelangelo’s frescoes if not for the church?
RF: Well, there is no denying that tons religious art is beautiful and inspiring to many around the world. This doesn’t, of course, speak to the truth of the beliefs. Asiatic religions throughout centuries have produced beautiful statues and tapestries, does this address whether or not the claims are true however? No.
It could be argued that war isn’t an entirely bankrupt operation using the same standards. War has produced tons of things we use today: medicines, technology, etc.. But the after-effects of War doesn’t address whether going to war in the first place was the right thing to do at that time.
I myself would not argue that religion is a bankrupt operation in it’s entirety. There are pluses and minuses, just as with war.
MW: Do you recognize a body of art that is sacred, but not religious, which does achieve a sort of spirituality, or is that just another name for religion?
RF: No… I don’t view any work of art as sacred or spiritual. That isn’t to say that some atheists cannot. Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith, may argue for instance that he indeed does feel a spiritualness when he views some non-religious art. I wouldn’t call it spiritual for I do not believe in a spirit. Certainly there may be some emotional aspects that are similar, but intellectually they are not. And no, I don’t think that spirituality is necessarily the same thing as religion. However, if you follow a religious doctrine, practice rituals and believe it dogmatically and unwaveringly, I’d say one is religious and practices a religion.
MW: As an atheist, is it hard for you to look at religious art? Can you admire the art of a crucifix without focusing on the religious aspect?
RF: I find some religious art quite beautiful. I sometimes wonder what was going through the minds of these devotees as they were painting. But, some Christian art, I think is ludicrous and horrid. The crucifix as you mentioned I find abhorrent. It is a symbol of death in my eyes. Especially
the ones where they actually show a figure (Jesus) on the cross.
Sometimes, blood and all!
I look at that and I place it into a modern context. How would we feel today if I wore a miniature bust of JFK around my Neck with two bullet holes in his head? Or what if I wore a Martin Luther King mini-bust with a bullet hole in his cheek? People would call me crazy, nuts, sick and deranged. Yet.. many Christians do this on a daily basis.
So no… I can not admire the crucifix. A golden image of him rising makes more sense, because then that truly shows an after death scenario. Even a standard bare cross could be interpreted as the Christian showing that Jesus isn’t there anymore.. but still again, why focus on the instrument of death? Kinda sick.
MW: You use the medium of broadcasting to explore contradictions in religious concepts. Do you see art as a medium that can do that same sort of thing? Have you seen any examples of art that has done that?
RF: Yes… artwork which reveals these contradictions and problems is fascinating. Much like comedy, art is a very exact and to-the-point way of conveying what the person is trying to get across. One the most memorable pieces of artwork that I have seen, though offensive to many… is a silhouetted depiction of Jesus on the cross. The words above his head read: “BRB LOL” Of course, in internet speak, this means, “Be Right Back, Laughing out Loud.” This is a good point in my opinion, for how much longer are we supposed to wait until Jesus returns? 5 years, 500, 5 million years? Most Christians believe that Jesus will return in their lifetimes. Sorry, they are deluded. Many generations before them thought the same thing. Jesus (Zeus) isn’t coming down upon the clouds. What century is this again?
Another fascinating work of art that I think all people curious about the Bible should visit, would be the bricktestament.com. Beautiful site that tells Bible stories using legos. It’s ingenious and might wake a few people up. Surprisingly, most Christians haven’t read the Bible and as such, they don’t even know what’s in it. This site, provides a very insightful and artistic way of telling Bible stories while at the same time, reveal contradictions and problems within the text.
MW: I’m sure you are aware of the recent controversy with the chocolate Jesus. There have been other major news stories in the elephant-dung Jesus at “Sensations” and the Danish Mohammad cartoons (to name a few). Do you have any insights into why religious figures and institutions take art so seriously that they insist on censoring it?
RF: Well… it’s really as simple as these groups have there own vision of what they think represents their faith. If you pervert that, they get offended, it’s really that simple… and understandable. What they fail to see however, is just how arbitrary it all is. One man’s dream, is another man’s nightmare. The very nature of artwork no?
* You can syndicate our news and blog using the file