christians... if you never studied art...?

Question

didn't really get much of a christian response last time i asked this question:

what could you tell me about the people who painted the da vinci's mona lisa, dali's vertigo, van gogh's starry night, or picasso's femme à la montre? would you be able to come to the conclusion that there was only one painter who painted all of them? would you be able to tell me why any of the artists painted any of them? could you tell me anything about any of their life's details? no. this is why i don't jive with this whole watchmaker analogy. how is it people can come to so many conclusions about a creator of the universe, if such a being does exist, just based on the fact that universe exists? it's one thing to say that there must be a creator. it's a whole other ball of wax though to assume that you know anything about who that creator is, if there is only one creator at all, and to assume you know what that creator thinks or wants. that, to me, seems more arrogant than anything. don't you think?

furthermore, would you even be able to tell me they were painted by a man? would you trust a book that said they were all painted by the same person? if you took a look at something painted by jackson pollock, how would you distinguish between that being painted by him and something that was just randomly splattered across a piece of canvas accidentally?

nemesis, you're futile and worthless...

a person of no faith doesn't claim to know all that either...

wildawox, how?

whatkindagone, that doesn't answer my question. we don't say there isn't a painter either, we just assume there is anything more than what we can see.

batgirl, that's not what i'm saying.

cal, don't the planets have radically different styles. the fact that their all part of the same universe doesn't account for the same creator, does it? that's like assuming all the art you find in a gallery is by the same artist.

furthermore, the bible is just one of many opposing opinions of what god is. how do you choose any and say this is the right one? each makes about as much sense as the others. at least with the artists, we have first hand accounts of people who knew them personally. everything in the bible is more or less hearsay.

nemesis, the question isn't about something i know anything about. i looked up some artists names and looked for painting they did. the question is meant to get people to think about if they can decipher anything about an artist simply by looking at the painting.

Answer 1

Good points but I can see this flying over a lot of heads

Answer 2

Perfect question for me since I'm a Christian and I've never studied art (I avoided "art appreciation" in college by taking French).

I probably could have told you that da vinci painted the mona lisa and that van gogh painted starry night...the other two would have been a guess (probably wrong). If you told me they were all painted by the same person, I'd question it because of the radically different styles. I can't tell you anything about the painters you mentioned (except a few tidbits picked up over the years).

Of course, if I had chosen art history as my major in college and then spent years working in the field, I have no doubt that I could tell you about da vinci, van gogh, picasso, and more. I suspect it would also be clear to an art history scholar that the styles and materials (and probably a whole lot more other evidence) establish these paintings as the work of different artists. I could also most likely tell you why they painted those paintings...to the extent that they communicated that information to others...and even Wikipedia has "life details" on these artists.

By the same token, I've spent enough time studying the bible to conclude that it is the work of a single author AND that the author had comprehensive knowledge of human nature. The fact that we know the bible was "written" by as many as 40 different men supports the conclusion that this single author had the supernatural ability speak his word through others. Furthermore, the author's complex and conceptually accurate portrayal of human nature suggests that the author had knowledge far beyond the people of the time (or even now).

Would it be arrogant for an art history professor to think that he or she understands something about da vinci or van gogh? Perhaps if they thought they knew everything that would be arrogant, but assuming some level of understanding, especially given the amount they probably read about these artists in their studies, isn't at all arrogant...it is the point of education! I don't assume I know everything or even very much about the creator of the universe, but I do understand some of what he chose to communicate about his motivations, purpose, and "life details" because I've spent 30+ years studying what he wrote about those topics!

Answer 3

About the Jackson Pollack ..I don't know ..I might think it was an accidental occurrence.
When you look at the others you would know they were by a different artist. They styles are as different as hand writing. From the classic realism of the Mona Lisa, to the surrealistic Dali..Nothing alike..The use of colour in Van Goghs starry night would look much different than the Picasso..but maybe you could think one artist. I don't think so. I think that anyone could gather something about the personality of the artist by looking at the brush strokes is nothing else. They might not agree with experts..but they would have an opinion.

Answer 4

No. This is not against God. You are not worshiping your chi. I am a Christian and I have been practicing martial arts for 22 years. Your Chi or Ki, is considered your internal energy. Some extreme Christians might think that it is "casting spells" or "sorcery", but in my opinion, those people are not doing God's work. The martial arts, when viewed as a whole, can be very confusing when it comes to spiritual matters. Most popular martial arts in America today originated in Asia and had deeply spiritual roots in Buddhism, or other non-Christian religions. It's also true, however, (especially in the U.S) that martial arts can be considered more of a science, or sport, in which Eastern mysticism plays little or no role. There are even a number of Christian martial arts schools and associations! It's interesting to note that many of the foundational values of traditional martial arts (rooted in eastern religions) are not in conflict with the doctrine of Jesus Christ. For instance, the five tenets of Tae Kwon Do as taught in many Tae Kwon Do schools: Courtesy - Consideration for others; respect, humbleness, and good manners. Phil 2:3-5 Integrity - Knowing right from wrong, and doing right; to be honest and good. Proverbs 10:9 Perseverance - To never give up in the pursuit of ones goals. Romans 5:3-4 Self-Control - To remain in control of your mind and body. Proverbs 16:32 Indomitable Spirit - The courage to stand by your principles, even against overwhelming odds. Genesis 32:24-30 Though this list is not found specifically in scripture, the tenets in it are certainly not un-Christ-like at all. The key then becomes how these martial art values are taught in the school. In a Christian martial arts school these values, though still true to the traditional art, would be taught and lived out through Christ's example. One of the more confusing issues for Christians in the martial arts seems to be the use of the term master. While the term has several definitions, in the martial arts sense, it is not in any way used to mean someone having control over others, or in a religious sense. The title is simply intended to denote an expert - someone who has reached a high level of achievement. The martial arts master is somebody who is highly skilled, and qualified to teach apprentices. Therefore, Master Instructor is someone who has reached the highest level as an instructor, similar in usage to a Master Chess player, or Master Craftsman. Personally, I can't imagine practicing martial arts without feeling the spiritual/philosophical side of it. It would seem empty. I don't find it at all in conflict with my Christianity. James

Answer 5

I studied art appreciation but only because it as required.

I studied "stuff" about the Creator, Christianity & the human "pathways" to God because I wanted to or even needed to.

For I believe that after one has come to a concrete realization that there indeed is a creator, then one can come to another realization that there must be a purpose to being created somehow or a reason for everything & that not everything happened by chance. And that being nothing to do with art or science or even philisophy but just something that one needed to find out for himself.

If you are convinced that there is no God, then well & good. But if you are convinced that there must be a God, then nothing can stop you from doing everything humanly possible to know everything about that God. And of course when you do "find out", it is indeed a form of arrogance, but it is an arrogance in much the same way as a non-believer would be in his belief or non-belief for that matter.

Answer 6

If you look carefully at what most Christians believe, you'll see that it is largely in line with what you have just said. We recognize that there are many things we will never know about God, so we don't try to guess the answers. But we can figure out a few things about the nature of God. Just as Picasso's shapes reveal a rebellious nature in the painter, so too, Jesus life as described in the Bible reveals a God of love. We don't need to have all the details, just the proper context.

Answer 7

Creation does not tell us WHO God is. That's what the Bible does. But even so, from creation we see that God;

* is powerful (look at a mighty waterfall or the thunder/ lightning)

* is generous (he provides food for everyone and thing)

* is loving (he didn't create only strawberries, but made a wide variety of food e.g the cocoa plant for those who like chocolate too)

* likes cleanness (look at how nature keeps itself clean, rain washes the dust off things, the dung beetle does his job too)

* has a sense of humour (ever watched animals at play?)


That's why the Bible says;
Romans 1:20- For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable;

Answer 8

Not even a person of no faith knows all that, your argument is futile and worthless. All your doing is just trying to seem intelligent, Oh I know I am to many people, but at least God cares, lol I guarantee you that I know something you dont and your argument is like me asking you something about I know that you don't, ud have no clue. But I do Believe their is something to learn always, but this arguement is simply the fact you know something someone else dont this has nothing to do with faith.

Answer 9

Good point. Good luck getting them to understand that there is a difference between the type of god you could potentially derive simply by observing nature (patheism), and the god of the Bible.

Answer 10

Why don't you just ask God to reveal himself to you and keep asking until it happens instead of warring with Christians over what they have seen and heard about their creator. If you saw a painting and someone else did not see it would you let them convince you that you didnt' see it?

Answer 11

Yet atheists say there was no painter. Things don't "paint" themselves, do they?

While you sit back saying there is no evidence for a creator, there is evidence all around you. You are evidence. Things don't just pop out of nowhere. This universe didn't just create itself, did it?

There is more to this life than just what you can see.