I still don't understand people like Servaas. He hasn't published artwork until now, but he is rating submissions bad, because in the screenshot was a women. Instead of telling me reasonable arguments, why I shouldn't do that, he has refered to Jesus and offended me to be pervert. Honestly, Everyone should be able to prey to his personal god, but he shouldn't annoy others with his religion.
Don't blame him.
The central problem is that Roman Catholicism has been scamming the world's religions for 1600 years on this subject. This is why we have the heavily spin-doctored translation of that often-quoted verse, Mt 5:28. If you read ancient Greek, you discover it doesn't say that at all.
And then there are all the verses that the standard bible-quoters ignore because they're just too uncomfortable.
I'm really getting tired of pointing out documented and verifiable fact to people who don't want to hear.
These people just really don't want to hear what Jesus Christ actually said.
keep your girls away
not every visitor has the same dirty mind as you have
if you need women nudity etc. to get attention for your artwork then your artwork is probably very bad garbage
the Lord Jesus said:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
so keep it away you are closing this open and public website for everyone
who wants to avoid adultery nudity etc but want tho have a nice theme...
I understand that there are some people, which don't like to see porn on the internet, because children may see them, but, honestly, these are beautiful pictures (and not dirty porn) and you will find similars in each catalogue for clothes.
Therefore I don't understand your aggressive reaction. Especially, because you have only logged in to comment pictures, which have skin. I have the impression, that you would make the same post, if you can only see her face, because you can see her skin.
Furthermore it seems, that you don't have thought about the reason, why I have chosen the file-name "attract attention" in the screenshot of Paysages. It should be a mirror, who tells:
"Hey guy, you have only clicked on this submission, because you have seen a gril. You should also have a look on other submissions, which don't contain girls in the screenshot."
Moreover you should follow this link:
http://lassekongo83.deviantart.com/
Although, each submission shows skin, they have been rated very well, because they aren't garbage.
I suggest, you shouldn't try to eliminate pictures of girls on the internet, because you will fail considerably - moreover, because you also can find boys.
By the way, guys, who refer to Jesus, make me laugh, cause they havent found a reasonable argument against such pictures.
Regarding Mt 5:28
Please look up "lust" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lust for a theological history of lust in general and a Koine Greek analysis of that verse in particular.
I used to think this KJV quotation was a proper translation. Now I know it is wrong.
Ratings & Comments
8 Comments
Great work - but naked acts of women were work of great painters and work of their are admired for today :)
The great impressionist Renoir once said, "If it hadn't been for the female breast, I never would have gone into art."
I still don't understand people like Servaas. He hasn't published artwork until now, but he is rating submissions bad, because in the screenshot was a women. Instead of telling me reasonable arguments, why I shouldn't do that, he has refered to Jesus and offended me to be pervert. Honestly, Everyone should be able to prey to his personal god, but he shouldn't annoy others with his religion.
Don't blame him. The central problem is that Roman Catholicism has been scamming the world's religions for 1600 years on this subject. This is why we have the heavily spin-doctored translation of that often-quoted verse, Mt 5:28. If you read ancient Greek, you discover it doesn't say that at all. And then there are all the verses that the standard bible-quoters ignore because they're just too uncomfortable. I'm really getting tired of pointing out documented and verifiable fact to people who don't want to hear. These people just really don't want to hear what Jesus Christ actually said.
If you don't like to, you don't have to.
keep your girls away not every visitor has the same dirty mind as you have if you need women nudity etc. to get attention for your artwork then your artwork is probably very bad garbage the Lord Jesus said: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. so keep it away you are closing this open and public website for everyone who wants to avoid adultery nudity etc but want tho have a nice theme...
I understand that there are some people, which don't like to see porn on the internet, because children may see them, but, honestly, these are beautiful pictures (and not dirty porn) and you will find similars in each catalogue for clothes. Therefore I don't understand your aggressive reaction. Especially, because you have only logged in to comment pictures, which have skin. I have the impression, that you would make the same post, if you can only see her face, because you can see her skin. Furthermore it seems, that you don't have thought about the reason, why I have chosen the file-name "attract attention" in the screenshot of Paysages. It should be a mirror, who tells: "Hey guy, you have only clicked on this submission, because you have seen a gril. You should also have a look on other submissions, which don't contain girls in the screenshot." Moreover you should follow this link: http://lassekongo83.deviantart.com/ Although, each submission shows skin, they have been rated very well, because they aren't garbage. I suggest, you shouldn't try to eliminate pictures of girls on the internet, because you will fail considerably - moreover, because you also can find boys. By the way, guys, who refer to Jesus, make me laugh, cause they havent found a reasonable argument against such pictures.
Regarding Mt 5:28 Please look up "lust" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lust for a theological history of lust in general and a Koine Greek analysis of that verse in particular. I used to think this KJV quotation was a proper translation. Now I know it is wrong.