It is allowed to Idolize Cleric’s who interpret Muhammad, but it’s not allowed to display a depiction of Muhammad?<\/p>\n
This just rings as another religious hypocrisy, as there are no paintings, photos or drawings of Muhammad (that’s forbidden), you can only depict what you believe Muhammad looked like, just like you can depict a laughing Jesus. It’s only someone’s ‘opinion’ of what Jesus, or Muhammad looks like not the real thing. <\/p>\n
It’s only an Idol, if you believe that it’s a true representation of what Muhammad, or Jesus, looks like. So if you are motivated to burn down buildings and attack others it’s because that you believe the depiction IS<\/b> Muhammad or Jesus, and that the depiction desecrates the TRUE image<\/b> of Muhammad, or Jesus. And that makes no sense at all, as no one has see either of them for thousands of years.<\/p>\n
Perhaps that’s why they burn national flags, as if a countries soul is embodied in the fabric somehow. <\/p>\n
Perhaps Muhammad was correct, no Icons, no imagined images of him, his cleric’s or his flags. That might make more sense.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It is allowed to Idolize Cleric’s who interpret Muhammad, but it’s not allowed to display a depiction of Muhammad? This just rings as another religious hypocrisy, as there are no paintings, photos or drawings of Muhammad (that’s forbidden), you can…<\/span><\/p>\n