Phil Tries to Correct The ShanMonster
The Anachronistic Letter
I read your page that was for proof on why jesus is goth.. well alot of your references were to paintings that were painted well after jesus' death.. you shouldnt really use that bc its just the painters depiction about what he thought was going down at that time.. just letting you know... no intetion in offending you.. later
Phil
The Anachronistic Response
What about the photo? Was that posthumous, too?
The Loophole Letter
I was just letting you know that there are some loop holes in your theory that could be exploited by somebody that wants to be a prick that would start bitching at you for that.. I guess that's me then.. oh well... ill give you more of an explanation on my point... you describe some characters from the bible as being gothic because of the way they dress, the bible isn't descriptive on this topic... and again.. the paintings.. they're just the artist's depiction.. . the only thing available is very undescriptive (of the dressing of the characters) text, the bible, barely tells what they wear and it says nothing about any of them wearing anything that would relate to gothic society the only reason that I emailed you is that you claimed to prove that Jesus was in fact Goth, but your statements that were supposed to prove it.. they were just too hokey .. and definetly didn't convince me.. what photo are you talking about?
Phil
The Loophole Response
I'm not terribly worried about people picking at loopholes in my theory. I'm good at finding loopholes, myself. So, I could find loopholes in their loopholes, and then, the next thing you know, we'll have a big ol' crocheted mass of theory. Maybe we could make an afghan out of it, or, better yet, a pair of fishnet stockings, because those are super-goth, dontcha know?
Clothing is described quite meticulously in various parts of the Bible. Although the fibre content isn't explicitly listed, I'm fairly sure non-gothic fabrics like polyester and fleece (as in sweatpants, not sheep) can be ruled out. Revelation 18:12 talks about "cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and pearls; fine linen, purple." This sounds very sumptuous--the sort of thing you might find discussed at length on alt.goth-fashion. Purple and scarlet are pretty goth colours, if you eschew black. According to Matthew 27:31, Jesus wore a scarlet cloak. According to John 19:2, it was purple. Either way, that sounds like the sort of high-gothic fashion emulated by figures like Anton LaVey, if you ask me.
I think it was pretty obvious that Jesus was a good dresser. Matthew 9:21 and Matthew 14:36 suggest he tended toward touch-me fabrics (velvet with silk fringes, mayhap?). Matthew 28:3 intimates he wore fabrics which worked wonderfully under black light ("Shafts of lightning blazed from him. His garments shimmered snow-white"). Also, Matthew 27:35 says, "When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots." If Christ had been wearing ugly duds, no one would have wanted his hand-me-downs.
Of course paintings are artists' depictions. Paintings don't spring fully-formed from the earth, but must be created by an artist. The photograph was also taken by an artist, although I'll be damned if I can figure out who had a camera at just that precise moment. Perhaps it was a Roman court photographer. Heh....
Ta!
[ Next Letter | Previous Letter | The ShanMonster Page |
Email ]
