CLICK HERE
FOR AN EXCELLENT
8-MINUTE OVERVIEW OF
GENESIS 12-50

Magnificent paintings and several wardrobe malfunctions. Thanks, Dan, for another showing of Biblical paintings.

Thanks, Debbie, for refraining from shooting the messenger.

#1, 10, 11, 26, 28 and of course the stained glass windows.

Fensters are like candy to you.

Very nice collection. Gustav Dore had a great talent for composition, imo.

I agree, now that you mention it. I had not previously articulated that in my own mind, but I believe you have nailed it, Ben.

Interesting ‘take’ from the variety of artists.....

I noticed this at the Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota, Fla
Beautiful paintings.....many on a religious theme......
.....but some were less than modest....
....and I don’t believe Rebekah was immodest at the well or anywhere else

Artist style I know........but still

Absolutely, as she demonstrated amply by veiling herself instantly upon encountering Isaac.

She is described as very beautiful. It might be interesting to just pull her out of each photo and sort them with their date to see what “beautiful” meant for each timeframe.

I found the first one very beautiful, and checked the date and late 1800, early 1900s.

Some of the ones I assume from the middle ages crack me up. Very different sense of beautiful.

I notice that, too, although I expect some of that is ethnic preference. But beauty is always in the eye of the beholder....

The one you placed in the first position is very deserving of the honor.

Copping had one of the finest representations yesterday as well.

Ol’ Harold has become one of my favorite artists.

Definitely #1. Far and away the most beautiful representation. Also, one of the few where she is portrayed as having the proper coloration of a Semite woman.

Good Morning, Dan!

I noticed the Wardrobe Malfunctions as well.

WHAT were those artists thinking?

Ya got me. I almost wish now that I had omitted them.

That would be censorship. Self-imposed, but still...

I'm reminded of Rush's saying @ feminism being the home of unattractive women...along those lines, I think the culture of the left, which we are unfortunately steeped in, hates much of what is beautiful. Conversely celebrating that which is ugly. I recall it being part of the commie goals, read into the Cong. record in the early '60's. It is often mentioned here on FR.

It has, in certain quarters, become 'sexist' to mention a woman's beauty/good looks. When Peter Parker complimented Mary Jane on her looks, her reply was sneering, saying something to the effect; "Oh, so therefore I have value?" To which he responded in the 'culturally approved' beta/cuck way, simpering some kind of apology.

To me, the left is at war against nature, against human nature, and anything 'natural'. Which brings me back to Rebekah being very beautiful. God thought it was important to mention in scripture, didn't He? I wonder why. I truly do. Is it because He knows Adam chose Eve because he saw her naked & was overcome by that?

Why is a woman 'being beautiful' important? Is it because they are the 'weaker sex' and must rely on their looks to get ahead/survive?
Note: for the most part - to posit that a woman has no value beyond physical beauty is not what I'm saying, nor is God imo. After all, He describes a more well-rounded character in other areas of scripture.

I noticed, like TP Pole, how the artists portrayed 'very beautiful'...I remember on your first series, Dan, that I commented on the women's 'attractiveness' in one painting...here:#107 https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3995110/posts...about Irma Martin at #17.

The ones here that I "behold" as close (kind of pretty) are #'s 17, 20, 25, 22 (composition in this one is beautiful in an of itself!), 27, (even though the face is veiled. the artist put a bit of sexy leg into it!)... and I think #30 wins. jmo

I agree with you about the human body being beautiful, and that God’s command “Be Fruitful and Multiply” does convey the idea that certain activities are required by us to obey that command!

I’m not prudish at all, dear FRiend. Sixty years as a rock musician and 50 as a biker have cured me of any of that! LOL.

But I am also a painter and attended Art College, which means, of course, painting nudes. That is far more challenging than landscapes, seascapes, or especially abstractions. And so, I know that Artists (especially in the Renaissance) would never miss an opportunity to portay a nude or semi-nude figure. This was not a spiritual thing, or even a prurient thing, but merely a way of showing off one’s “chops”, like a rock star taking an extended solo in the middle of a song. Sometimees the solo is warranted, but sometimes it is incongruous and out-of-place. Such is the situation with Rebecca’s “Wardrobe Malfunctions”. She was venturing out to water the sheep, among shepherds who were male, and not of her family.

Her beauty was apparent to Abraham’s Servant even without the décolletage.

But, you MUST know if you follow this thread with any regularity, that Dan and I tease each other mercilessly about the art he posts. We feel comfortable doing so, because he knows I am an artist, and his “little sister in Christ”. Brothers and Sisters are famous for teasing each other because they have a much deeper relationship than the rest of the world.

And so, by teasing Dan about Rebecca’s sartorial negligence, I was not engaging in the communist practice of celebrating the “ugly” or being an overly sensitive feminist. In fact, both you and Rush are completely correct about that aspect of the Left.

Anyway, enjoy the art! See you next time! :-)