I had a great squabble on youtube this week about how Jesus really looked.
Someone uploaded an AI generated picture of how Jesus really 'looked'. Well, I commented that a picture based on some chosen depiction of Jesus was worthless since there are no contemporaneous drawings of Jesus, or any evidence that he was real.
Well, the believers didn't like that. Noses out of joint. Now that's what I'm talking about. Rubbing believers up the wrong way. I've missed it.
Sure beats the hell out of squabbling with agnostics on this site.
Gotta take your kicks when you can I guess.
So, you have PLENTY of free time......
No matter how busy I am, I can always find time to throw a spanner into a religious person's works.
This one i know. It wasn't developed from fancy AI tech using a bust or sketch or painting of someone from the past, but an anthropological image suggesting how a person of that age and race and so on might have looked. This one I have no problem with because it doesn't claim to be something its not. I imagine males at that time and place and ethnicity might have had that kind of appearance.
Personally I always loved the modern traditional image, and theory that it is based on Cesare Borgia. ( [en.wikipedia.org] ) The idea of all those Christians bowing down before a crime boss, is just wonderful.
Ha! I love it.
We all need to kick the hornets nest once in a while.