Seattle cartoonist: May 22 is ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed Day’

Originally posted by seagull

Originally posted by andy1033

Typical american, go blow up countries, and start wars against people that have nothing to do with you, then your mad that people do not like you.

Yep... Every single one of us... Blowin' up countries...then having the gall to be upset when folks get pissed... Please spare me the typical non american viewpoint...

Not to be insolent...but it is being done in your name.

reply to post by Ufokrazy


Mohammad is not their God. He is their prophet. He talked to God, but he made no claim to divinity himself.

The reason they dont allow images is because the Quran instructs them not to worship idols. There is no reason not to have an image of Mohammad. Thats a custom they have because of the rule against worshipping his image.

Clearly, cartoons of him are not worshipful. Nor are non-Muslims making images of him forcing Muslims to worship those images. The whole point of not worshipping images was to keep God the central figure, and to keep the attention of the faithful on God.

Extremists making such a big to-do about images of Mohammad are in one sense actually thwarting the purpose of the custom of no images. Only to them, the non-image of Mohammad is the idol, or thing that is being given attention that should belong to God.

Either way, its ridiculous. Its a bunch of nutjobs, making Islam look stupid, and no one should give in to them. Moderate Muslims should speak out against them, much like moderate Christians spoke out against the abortion clinic bombers and other Christian nutjobs.

[edit on 26-4-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]

I posted this on another thread, but I can't seem to get an answer, perhaps I'll have better luck over here.


Ok, I am going to write the questions I have while trying to wrap my mind around the illustrations of Muhammad, and I sincerely hope either a Muslim or someone knowledgeable in Islam will answer them.

First, as I stated before, no where in the Quran does God prohibit depicting Muhammad or anyone else. This "command" is found in the Hadith. Which brings me to.....

Question number 1, as I understand it the Hadith is a compilation of the life and sayings of Muhammad. Muslims emphatically believe that Muhammad was merely a man, a prophet, who received revelations from an angel (Gabriel) which was the direct word of God. Now, the Hadiths were not revelations but how Muhammad lived. In the Hadith it says there are to be no pictures of any living thing, which by default would include Muhammad, but it would also include yourself, your children, your cat, etc. (you get it). It includes family photographs, t.v., movies, paintings. So at some point the ban of lifted on most items, and replaced with the "command" to only pertain to Muhammad. How and why? Also, it appears that this was not always the case as there are some beautiful pieces of art from I believe during and before the Ottoman Empire. Oh, I believe the Hadith said something to the effect of it not being a forbidden thing (pictures) but that it is better not to do it, and if it is done that it must be respectful.

Question 2, In the Quran, it states that Muhammad was not sinless, that he and all others were to repent their sins. So, why is what he did or said currently being considered as, well as I see it, as divine, that Muhammad could command as God commands. A person that has sinned and has the potential to sin again is not perfect and his words are not divine, only when speaking after/during the revelations. I'm not sure if that is clear to the reader, so if not ask and I'll clarify.

New.........
Last, I'm not sure how I feel about draw Muhammad day. Personally, I'm not to keen on media that solely attempting to mock a group, whatever group it is (since from time to time it happens be me). However, I do feel that this is an issue that needs to be discussed and perhaps there does need to be a catapult, I just think it would carry more weight if it came from perhaps Muslim cartoonists.

Question number 1, as I understand it the Hadith is a compilation of the life and sayings of Muhammad. Muslims emphatically believe that Muhammad was merely a man, a prophet, who received revelations from an angel (Gabriel) which was the direct word of God. Now, the Hadiths were not revelations but how Muhammad lived. In the Hadith it says there are to be no pictures of any living thing, which by default would include Muhammad, but it would also include yourself, your children, your cat, etc. (you get it). It includes family photographs, t.v., movies, paintings. So at some point the ban of lifted on most items, and replaced with the "command" to only pertain to Muhammad. How and why? Also, it appears that this was not always the case as there are some beautiful pieces of art from I believe during and before the Ottoman Empire. Oh, I believe the Hadith said something to the effect of it not being a forbidden thing (pictures) but that it is better not to do it, and if it is done that it must be respectful.

Im a muslim, and im trying to get into freelance as an artist. I am forbidden as a muslim to draw any type of lifeform except plants. Animals and humans with eyes, ears etc.

I have been drawing figures and portraits for most of my life, and i also believe this to be 1 of the countless amounts of sins ive done.. I believe that over the long course of it, drawing humans/lifeforms etc etc is bad because over the course people will bgin to idolise them instead of God. Examples like animals, many og whom represent many pagan deities that are worshiped. And also today the younger generation fall into watching all types of cartoons, some which may have forms of indoctrination eg Disney.. so this is why i believe it is wrong. The ban on depicting lifeforms is more like a prevention of what the art itself can escalate to.
And yes i believe im gonna burn for it :s Id regard myself as being quite religious as well, but also acknowledge were not all perfect eh?

Question 2, In the Quran, it states that Muhammad was not sinless, that he and all others were to repent their sins. So, why is what he did or said currently being considered as, well as I see it, as divine, that Muhammad could command as God commands. A person that has sinned and has the potential to sin again is not perfect and his words are not divine, only when speaking after/during the revelations. I'm not sure if that is clear to the reader, so if not ask and I'll clarify.

He wasnt sinless your right, but dont take it too much out of context, islams views on sin especially concerning the prophets were different than others for example being in sin was seemed more as a error rather than evil per se. From what i remember i got taught that i think jesus and abraham were the only sinless prophets though im not too sure. I will have to look into this more..
Also about mohammad saw and his sins, his past present and future sins were all forgiven by God. I know this begs a million questions like omg that means the prophet couldve been the most sinful dude in the world but he was just given the greencard by God.. this is not the case, and i urge people to do research into islam to find out more about the personality of the prophet etc etc.

oh damn, here come the endless flaming on our prophet and religion :S...

Much peace and love and i hope to clarify more on this after i can learn to better explain things

Originally posted by nastyj

Im a muslim, and im trying to get into freelance as an artist. I am forbidden as a muslim to draw any type of lifeform except plants. Animals and humans with eyes, ears etc.

I have been drawing figures and portraits for most of my life, and i also believe this to be 1 of the countless amounts of sins ive done.. I believe that over the long course of it, drawing humans/lifeforms etc etc is bad because over the course people will bgin to idolise them instead of God. Examples like animals, many og whom represent many pagan deities that are worshiped. And also today the younger generation fall into watching all types of cartoons, some which may have forms of indoctrination eg Disney.. so this is why i believe it is wrong. The ban on depicting lifeforms is more like a prevention of what the art itself can escalate to.
And yes i believe im gonna burn for it :s Id regard myself as being quite religious as well, but also acknowledge were not all perfect eh?

Well, from one person to another, I certainly hope you don't burn for your artwork. Personally, I believe that intent carries a lot of weight, although I'm not God and only He knows for sure. What I mean is, God knows if your intent is to worship the object or if is a reminder to us of some of His great work. Certainly peoples admiration may escalate into idolatry, but that doesn't mean that it will, and I'm certain God is able to sort that out, after all He sees our soul, achievements, failures, and everything in between.
I suppose what baffles me about the subject is that I know many Muslims, and they are nearly always armed with a camera, photos of everyone, everywhere, especially their kids. The only time that the whole picture image comes up as command, is in regard to Muhammad, and only in relation to Muhammad. Honestly, religion seems to be a sensitive ground, particularly when questioning some core beliefs. Most Muslims I know genuinely believe that it is forbidden by the Quran to have pics of Muhammad.

He wasnt sinless your right, but dont take it too much out of context, islams views on sin especially concerning the prophets were different than others for example being in sin was seemed more as a error rather than evil per se. From what i remember i got taught that i think jesus and abraham were the only sinless prophets though im not too sure. I will have to look into this more..
Also about mohammad saw and his sins, his past present and future sins were all forgiven by God. I know this begs a million questions like omg that means the prophet couldve been the most sinful dude in the world but he was just given the greencard by God.. this is not the case, and i urge people to do research into islam to find out more about the personality of the prophet etc etc.

oh damn, here come the endless flaming on our prophet and religion :S...

Much peace and love and i hope to clarify more on this after i can learn to better explain things

I'm not sure about Islamic view on Abraham and Jesus, from Muslims I have heard that Jesus Christ did not commit sin, but in looking around the internet just now, all I could find was that all "sons of Adam" are sinful including Jesus Christ (I'm not certain if a virgin birth is still a son of Adam, but I'm probably digressing).

No flames, as I said I genuinely wanted your perspective, which I greatly appreciate. Perhaps, what I am questioning is the actual authority of the Hadith. I understand its supplemental and commentary value in relation to the Quran, for Muslims. What I do not understand is how there are commands from God in it when there where no revelations involved, when the Quran is the word of God and Hadith is the word of Muhammad. Again, I'm not sure if that's clear.

I guess what I'm trying to say is if God wanted to command followers to observe rules, ie no pictures, wouldn't He have addressed in the ultimate authority for Muslims? If it was something bad enough to damn a person to hellfire, for however long, I would think it would have been included in the complete text.

Again thanks and peace and love back to you

Wonder how many people are actually going to partake in this event?....

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by seagull

Originally posted by andy1033

Typical american, go blow up countries, and start wars against people that have nothing to do with you, then your mad that people do not like you.

Yep... Every single one of us... Blowin' up countries...then having the gall to be upset when folks get pissed... Please spare me the typical non american viewpoint...

Not to be insolent...but it is being done in your name.

"Not to be insolent", The Jihadi's are committing acts in "Islam's" name.

The beauty of it, is that everyone is allowed to participate.

reply to post by Alxandro


That is a nice one,

I am saving my drawing for the 22nd.

BUMP!

10 days to go.

Can't wait!

Originally posted by prionace glauca

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by seagull

Originally posted by andy1033

Typical american, go blow up countries, and start wars against people that have nothing to do with you, then your mad that people do not like you.

Yep... Every single one of us... Blowin' up countries...then having the gall to be upset when folks get pissed... Please spare me the typical non american viewpoint...

Not to be insolent...but it is being done in your name.

"Not to be insolent", The Jihadi's are committing acts in "Islam's" name.

It is one thing to attribute the acts of certain religious nutbars to the faith in it's entirety. It's quite another to make it American national policy.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Feel free to be insolent...I certainly don't mind.

...yes, it's being done in my name. ...and I don't much care for it.

Nor do I much care for the stereotyped caricatures of all Americans as bloodthirsty, bomb hurling morons without a speck of common decency. ...and I'll say so.

But, as I said, you're certainly welcome to be as insolent as you like...

...

...

...so long as it's within the T's and C's. couldn't resist...

As much as I hate will tampering, SOME OF YOU WILL BE VERY MAD..UM JUST SAYEEEEN..RESPECT YOUR BROTHERS can non see the same angel GABRIEL ENCOUNTERED CHRIST BIRTH AND MUHAMMAD INSIGHTS YOU ARE THE SAME......SMMFH @ THE IGNORANCE this is what causes rights to be pulled and many cannot even see the fuggery SHAME but will cry like WHY ARE MY RIGHTS GONE IN THIS NEW WORLD ORDER.

Has the event organiser now reconsidered the initial intentions of the campaign? It would seem so based on the current event description?

What a whimp, no integrity.

reply to post by The Blind Watchmaker


The way I understood what she did was pull her official sponsoring of the event, even though she came up with the idea, because too many people were wanting to depict Mohammad in a bad way.

That was not her intention at all. She was trying to make the point that EVERYONE should be able to draw whatever they want. Including Mohammad. But too many people were turning it into a hate event against Muslims. And that was not her intention.

I will be back on Saturday with my contribution

Originally posted by andy1033
Typical american, go blow up countries, and start wars against people that have nothing to do with you, then your mad that people do not like you.

Amazing how americans have no respect for nothing, while obama gets america to torture and kill all over the world, they just want to rub it in there face.

At least usa will be like everywhere else one day, and man do these people not have any clue about what they are talking about. I do not like muslims, but man americans are obsessed with creating hatred against foreign people for no reason.

Ron paul is the only sensible american out of 300 million, and he is misunderstood because he is a passive man, something against american tradition of violence.

If your a passive person in this world, americans goes mental, that people exist they cannot understand.

Ok, here's my entry.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk,... BOOM!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8040c36dfb2b.jpg[/atsimg]

I fully support this holiday! ha. I made my own in paint but alas not smart enough to put it on a thread! lol too tired to research it right now.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by Ufokrazy

 

Mohammad is not their God. He is their prophet. He talked to God, but he made no claim to divinity himself.

The reason they dont allow images is because the Quran instructs them not to worship idols. There is no reason not to have an image of Mohammad. Thats a custom they have because of the rule against worshipping his image.

Clearly, cartoons of him are not worshipful. Nor are non-Muslims making images of him forcing Muslims to worship those images. The whole point of not worshipping images was to keep God the central figure, and to keep the attention of the faithful on God.

Extremists making such a big to-do about images of Mohammad are in one sense actually thwarting the purpose of the custom of no images. Only to them, the non-image of Mohammad is the idol, or thing that is being given attention that should belong to God.

Either way, its ridiculous. Its a bunch of nutjobs, making Islam look stupid, and no one should give in to them. Moderate Muslims should speak out against them, much like moderate Christians spoke out against the abortion clinic bombers and other Christian nutjobs.

[edit on 26-4-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]

If he is not worshiped, then how come every first born male is named mohammed?? I work with several muslims and somewhere in their first or middle name they use mohammed. I believe it is a way to help the prophecy out when mohammed will be the last one. that sure sounds like idol worshiping to me.