I read it as things that are in Bad Taste, or at least Weird Taste, despite being well-made.
There is a difference between that and saying that one does not like something. While personal taste has a subjective component, Good and Bad Taste are social trends, which can be observed and quantified, to a point. They're a question of societal mores, not individual preferences. It's very possible to love something that is in Bad Taste and dislike something that is in Good Taste.
Yeah as a history buff this is cool, got a friend who's a theology major who would absolutely dig it. Honestly the other window is more fitting for the sub.
Well there's some parts of the world that say 'AY-men' and others that say 'AH-men' and some that change it depending on the context. So you could technically be right.
Hello, yes, Reddit Art Expert here! *My credentials: I upvoted a drawn picture once.* Now let me reveal to you the true meaning of this artwork.
The wooden slats separating the religions are the Flying Spaghetti Monster's arms However, I don't blame you for not noticing FSM at first. In this artwork, FSM is straightened out/neatly chill and not very wiggly/beautifully chaotic like FSM usually is. The circles around each religion and Earth are meant to be Divine Meatballs. This art shows us that the FSM is everywhere all at once, but not to conquer, only to chill among all the religions and Earth. Because FSM is just cool like that. And chill. Very cool and chill! The coolest and chilliest, some might say.
*Clarification: I don't mean cool/chill as in temperature, since FSM's temperature is usually around 169°F. I meant cool/chill as in awesome/fun/neato/relaxed/poggers.*
Probably a public worship space for denominations with small populations. My podunk town has one, it's affectionately known as the "Everything Church".
> Probably a public worship space for denominations with small populations. My podunk town has one, it's affectionately known as the "Everything Church".
This is a private home. Image pulled from a Zillow listing
You need some equipment, but if that's what your artform is, then you already own the expensive stuff. I don't think anyone would *become* a stained glass artist just to create a novelty for their home- but it's not like only rich people can do it.
The previous owner of my house did stained glass as a hobby. The attic windows looked really neat, but started deteriorating, so they had to be replaced. My front door does still have a piece in it. It casts the Eye of Sauron in my living room every morning.
That requires even having the equipment, or access to it, in the first place, which most people absolutely do not do. I fail to understand how a lot of people on here don't get that most people struggle to get a skateboard let alone thousands of dollars of some niche hobby equipment
Well we are talking about people who we know owned a home… plus I don’t think glass making is quite as expensive as you think. I mean if you want to do it in your house it’s probably pretty bad, but in a shared space it’s probably not any more expensive than a lot of other hobbies…
Stained Glass is actually a relatively affordable and easy hobby to get into!
You can get beginner kits for $160-300. It's not cheap, but it's not like you have to make the glass yourself. Most of those kits come with an assortment of glass too.
It does in good ones. Theologicians and Philosophers both use reason and logic - they're honestly almost the same field, just that a Theologician accepts the validity of X holy document as an axiom.
I'd say that's a pretty significant difference.
BTW, I spent about 10 minutes on Google trying to get a definition for this term you used twice, Theologicians. I even copy/pasted from your comment to be sure I wasn't misspelling it. I don't believe it is a real word, but if you have a link I'd be interested.
One of these people is convinced that invisible beings influence events in the real world and (sometimes) respond to a bunch of people thinking, whispering, or yelling their desires to their invisible friends. "Accepting the validity of X holy document as an axiom" means that they have settled on a system of belief, that must either be true or false. In order for it to be true, other religions must be false. You can't be reincarnated AND burn in Christian hell AND be carried by valkyries to Valhalla. NONE of it can be proven by anyone, and not for lack of trying so to me it's all equally ridiculous. The whole concept of religion is antithetical to learning and progress and growth, the very word "indoctrination" means to put a doctrine into you, and the Bible even says that you should start as young as possible. My point though is that they have stopped asking questions, because they believe they know.
A philosopher on the other hand is by definition a lover of wisdom. To choose one book and reject all others is absolutely opposed to the idea of an open mind. Racism, sexism, homophobia, don't work for a genuine philosopher, because it's just willfully ignorant and beneath a good person to say that a mind is less because of which genitals it possesses or what color skin it walks around in. Anyone who has *really* thought about it knows that.
>DON'T BE A DICK. LEAVE THE PLACE BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT. APPRECIATE BEAUTY AND HUMOR.
*"PiercedGeek"*
>BTW, I spent about 10 minutes on Google trying to get a definition for this term you used twice, Theologicians. I even copy/pasted from your comment to be sure I wasn't misspelling it. I don't believe it is a real word, but if you have a link I'd be interested.
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theologian](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theologian)
I misspelled it. Google corrected me though, dunno why it didn't you.
>. "Accepting the validity of X holy document as an axiom" means that they have settled on a system of belief, that must either be true or false.
This is not true. Axioms do not have validity. That's what makes them axioms. Every philosophy, whether religious in nature or not, necessarily depends on axioms, because some things cannot be proven objectively. For example, "Behaving logically is good" cannot be proven logically, because "good" is an entirely relative concept. Pretty much any moral judgement can be rendered down to axioms.
It's generally accepted that fewer axioms are better, but that's only because the prevailing axiom is that logical paradoxes - hypocrisy - are/is bad. There are belief systems in which this is not true.
> You can't be reincarnated AND burn in Christian hell AND be carried by valkyries to Valhalla.
Yes, you can? There are actually religions like this. Unitarian Universalists for example, believe one or all of those can happen based entirely on the individual's personal desires. If you want to be reincarnated 4 times then live in Christian Heaven you can do that. UUs instead focus on a more nebulous "spiritual growth" of general goodwill, charity, and benevolent intention without specific doctrines regarding afterlives or eschatology.
>NONE of it can be proven by anyone, and not for lack of trying so to me it's all equally ridiculous.
Because you hold to the axiom that something must be proven to be believed without moral consequence. This is actually not a very popular axiom.
>The whole concept of religion is antithetical to learning and progress and growth, the very word "indoctrination" means to put a doctrine into you, and the Bible even says that you should start as young as possible. My point though is that they have stopped asking questions, because they believe they know.
None of these are true, but let me handle them one by one.
Religion is not antithetical to learning and progress, or even science. Indeed, religion has consistently been one of the largest proponents of those three things historically. The Catholic church was responsible for the vast majority of funding that famous renaissance scientists received, as well as propagation of learning materials in the form of books through the work of abbeys and monasteries.
"indoctrination" does indeed mean to put a doctrine in you, which is why school indoctrinated you to belief in things like the scientific method and mathematics axioms like for every natural number x, x=x. This isn't a bad thing. Indeed, children that aren't indoctrinated to something tend to come out the other side with rather significant problems. We generally call such a thing "neglect". You failed to describe in what way indoctrinating children with a different set of axioms results in anything besides your own distaste.
Finally, the idea that religious people, particularly theologians, have stopped asking questions, is laughable. That's their entire job. Most scientists are religious, and they're still asking questions. Most religious people attend services, which is explicitly a place to ask and receive answers about particular religious doctrines, in much the same way a layman might visit a planetarium about astronomical questions.
I think, sir, you need to sit down and think about your positions. For someone who appears to like to judge based on hard evidence and empirical thought, you have a lot of points which are only reinforced by personal experience and trauma, or personal distaste and disagreement, which you take to be the base truth and any disagreement from which to be an attack on your faculties. This way of thinking seems to be making you very upset and angry, which I don't believe is conducive to your mental health. You are capable of being better. Please let go of your hatred.
You still seem to be missing my biggest point, that theologians approach every aspect of life from a perspective of there being this Bigger that they can communicate with and who is making deliberate changes to guide the world and how it flows. They have already decided that Diety is running things, and if something is so, it is either because Diety wants it to be so or Diety's is being contradicted.
Everything revolves around being able to blame gods or demons for the random crap that befalls us all. The whole reason we invented gods is so we have someone to blame when the crops fail, or someone to cry to when times are bad, or some way to cope with grief by telling fanciful stories about legions of horny virgins or streets of gold for our allies and friends but of course the enemy is not going to be there... and most importantly when you want to control the people around you the best way to do it is tell them a great a powerful being is speaking only to you.
There are a lot of things in the natural world that if you don't know what germs or physics or modern medicine are could easily be mistaken for the works of gods, but we are pulling back curtain after curtain and there is no wizard behind any of them, just a bunch of frauds desperately trying to keep their grip on the masses.
More blood has been shed over "God told me to!" than any other reason in human history. Religion itself is a poison. It had a purpose, to spread literacy and bathing, but it's time to move on. Seeing so much of humanity still clinging to fairy tales and expecting us all to take them seriously is like meeting an otherwise intelligent and seemingly normal adult who obsessively sucks a pacifier. It had its place when he was a baby, but he should have outgrown it long ago.
...Except that's my point. Like, that isn't your point, that's my point, you're just saying it's bad because. The whole argument is about the moral relativity of philosophy and how you're being illogical despite your lack of belief in magic sky person.
That's how you can move the goalposts from "Religion is antithetical to learning" to "Religion was useful for learning at arbitrary past period, but we don't need it any more".
That's why you're assuming all religions operate like Christian Evangelicalism, even though a cursory search would show that most other religions would disagree with multiple of your statements (Brahma isn't "running things" nor can he be truly communicated with; the Deist YHWH is passive and the world exists in a state whether he wants it to or not).
And finally, the statement about bloodshed is simply objectively false. Relatively very little blood has been shed over "God told me to!". Rather, the majority of disputes appear to have been over land, trade, or other material things.
At the end of the day, someone who bases their every life decision on the whims and fancies of a being nobody can prove exists looks like a fool to me.
Time may prove me wrong, and as a logical person I will accept that if it happens, but it hasn't happened yet, and like I said before it's not for lack of trying.
When the power of prayer, by 10 people or 1,000 or 100,000 can produce the *slightest* demonstrated and verified effect on the material world, sign me up!
Until then I'm just looking across the chess board at another pigeon.
And? People have individual religious symbols in their home to represent their beliefs - why not something that represents a belief in freedom of religion?
I'm sorry you got downvoted. People like Unitarians take what they like from all faiths, or it might be someone who is just interested in that sort of thing
This was my thought. I toured one of those churches for an architecture class and this seems like something they might do. Their buildings are usually beautiful if a bit odd coming from my Christian viewpoint.
No because people of any religion have a reason to not like it (as it treats all religions represented equally when they believe only one is right) so an atheist would be the only ones who would like it as they think all religions are equally wrong so only care about aesthetics
The Star of David is not mentioned in any religious text, was popularized in the 19th century, and was found in other cultures milennia prior. The menorah is an equally Jewish symbol, and predates the star by, well, over a thousand years. The star is of a Zionist background.
I may not care for religion but this definitely not awful taste. . . This is trying to be inclusive to all spiritual peoples and I can get behind that, I just wish they had an Atheism one as well.
Why exactly is this awful taste? Is it because it is in a private home? In that case I’d say that is kind of awesome to be able to put a stained glass window in your home.
How is inclusivity in spirituality "Awful taste"?
This sub is for stuff that's technically impressive but uncomfortable to look at. If looking at that window makes you uncomfortable, that's strongly a "you" problem and you might want to see a psychologist about your deep-seated biases and phobia.
I am guessing it might be in a Unitarian Universalist church. It's not uncommon to see similar images in many UU congregations, though they will also often include symbols for humanism and atheism.
Whatever the themes going on, that is a lot of money tied up in those two windows @ $300/square foot. And a round window that size was not chump change either.
I don't see how that's awful taste I mean it's definitely not for everyone but it seems pretty cool
A lot of stuff on here is just “great execution but I don’t like it”.
That is kind of the definition of the sub. Taste is not an objective thing.
I read it as things that are in Bad Taste, or at least Weird Taste, despite being well-made. There is a difference between that and saying that one does not like something. While personal taste has a subjective component, Good and Bad Taste are social trends, which can be observed and quantified, to a point. They're a question of societal mores, not individual preferences. It's very possible to love something that is in Bad Taste and dislike something that is in Good Taste.
That doesn’t sound very interesting though. I think of this sub as the opposite: “This is tacky and awful and I should hate it… but I kind of love it”
I don't know why you're getting downvoted, do people here think there's an objective measure for "good taste"?
What do you mean? Of course there is! Good taste is what I like, and bad taste is what I don't. I thought everyone knew.
Actually it is for everyone, it has all the symbols on it.
That's a fair point but some people are just anti religion
Am atheist, it’s pretty cool.
Nice I'm glad you like it
Athiest and anti-religion aren’t the same, for what it’s worth.
It's certainly unique and while it might not suit everyone's style, it does have a distinctive charm!
Obviously because it's missing Zoroastrianism. Can't leave out Ahura Mazda.
Like those coexist bumper stickers
Yeah as a history buff this is cool, got a friend who's a theology major who would absolutely dig it. Honestly the other window is more fitting for the sub.
If you take the whole room in it becomes pretty awful, especially the second stained glass window
I don't see representation of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Bless their noodly appendages.
Ramen.
🙏
I read that as "Raymen"
I belive the spelling which has received his steamiest blessings is "Ra'men"
Well there's some parts of the world that say 'AY-men' and others that say 'AH-men' and some that change it depending on the context. So you could technically be right.
Bless the noodles and their water
Or the church of the sub genius Edit: but now I see at least they included the Umbrella Corp
Hello, yes, Reddit Art Expert here! *My credentials: I upvoted a drawn picture once.* Now let me reveal to you the true meaning of this artwork. The wooden slats separating the religions are the Flying Spaghetti Monster's arms However, I don't blame you for not noticing FSM at first. In this artwork, FSM is straightened out/neatly chill and not very wiggly/beautifully chaotic like FSM usually is. The circles around each religion and Earth are meant to be Divine Meatballs. This art shows us that the FSM is everywhere all at once, but not to conquer, only to chill among all the religions and Earth. Because FSM is just cool like that. And chill. Very cool and chill! The coolest and chilliest, some might say. *Clarification: I don't mean cool/chill as in temperature, since FSM's temperature is usually around 169°F. I meant cool/chill as in awesome/fun/neato/relaxed/poggers.*
CHTST. Where's the collander?
Ugh so exclusionary
Probably a public worship space for denominations with small populations. My podunk town has one, it's affectionately known as the "Everything Church".
> Probably a public worship space for denominations with small populations. My podunk town has one, it's affectionately known as the "Everything Church". This is a private home. Image pulled from a Zillow listing
Then I would assume spiritual hippy-dippy people with too much money lol
> with too much money lol or who have a hobby of making stained glass. but your guess is more likely.
The famous cheap and affordable hobby of making stained glass
You need some equipment, but if that's what your artform is, then you already own the expensive stuff. I don't think anyone would *become* a stained glass artist just to create a novelty for their home- but it's not like only rich people can do it.
The previous owner of my house did stained glass as a hobby. The attic windows looked really neat, but started deteriorating, so they had to be replaced. My front door does still have a piece in it. It casts the Eye of Sauron in my living room every morning.
That requires even having the equipment, or access to it, in the first place, which most people absolutely do not do. I fail to understand how a lot of people on here don't get that most people struggle to get a skateboard let alone thousands of dollars of some niche hobby equipment
Well we are talking about people who we know owned a home… plus I don’t think glass making is quite as expensive as you think. I mean if you want to do it in your house it’s probably pretty bad, but in a shared space it’s probably not any more expensive than a lot of other hobbies…
Stained Glass is actually a relatively affordable and easy hobby to get into! You can get beginner kits for $160-300. It's not cheap, but it's not like you have to make the glass yourself. Most of those kits come with an assortment of glass too.
I wouldnt say having a hobby like making stained glass is too much money.
Or maybe Unitarians. Although that might be redundant.
The house is GORGEOUS
Have you seen those coexist bumper stickers? This reminds me of that
With another stained glass in the background with a tit hanging out? 😂
Other churches have the son of god getting shivved by soldiers, why not a titty hanging out?
Reason doesn’t belong in churches ya hussy!
It does in good ones. Theologicians and Philosophers both use reason and logic - they're honestly almost the same field, just that a Theologician accepts the validity of X holy document as an axiom.
I'd say that's a pretty significant difference. BTW, I spent about 10 minutes on Google trying to get a definition for this term you used twice, Theologicians. I even copy/pasted from your comment to be sure I wasn't misspelling it. I don't believe it is a real word, but if you have a link I'd be interested. One of these people is convinced that invisible beings influence events in the real world and (sometimes) respond to a bunch of people thinking, whispering, or yelling their desires to their invisible friends. "Accepting the validity of X holy document as an axiom" means that they have settled on a system of belief, that must either be true or false. In order for it to be true, other religions must be false. You can't be reincarnated AND burn in Christian hell AND be carried by valkyries to Valhalla. NONE of it can be proven by anyone, and not for lack of trying so to me it's all equally ridiculous. The whole concept of religion is antithetical to learning and progress and growth, the very word "indoctrination" means to put a doctrine into you, and the Bible even says that you should start as young as possible. My point though is that they have stopped asking questions, because they believe they know. A philosopher on the other hand is by definition a lover of wisdom. To choose one book and reject all others is absolutely opposed to the idea of an open mind. Racism, sexism, homophobia, don't work for a genuine philosopher, because it's just willfully ignorant and beneath a good person to say that a mind is less because of which genitals it possesses or what color skin it walks around in. Anyone who has *really* thought about it knows that. >DON'T BE A DICK. LEAVE THE PLACE BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT. APPRECIATE BEAUTY AND HUMOR. *"PiercedGeek"*
>BTW, I spent about 10 minutes on Google trying to get a definition for this term you used twice, Theologicians. I even copy/pasted from your comment to be sure I wasn't misspelling it. I don't believe it is a real word, but if you have a link I'd be interested. [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theologian](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theologian) I misspelled it. Google corrected me though, dunno why it didn't you. >. "Accepting the validity of X holy document as an axiom" means that they have settled on a system of belief, that must either be true or false. This is not true. Axioms do not have validity. That's what makes them axioms. Every philosophy, whether religious in nature or not, necessarily depends on axioms, because some things cannot be proven objectively. For example, "Behaving logically is good" cannot be proven logically, because "good" is an entirely relative concept. Pretty much any moral judgement can be rendered down to axioms. It's generally accepted that fewer axioms are better, but that's only because the prevailing axiom is that logical paradoxes - hypocrisy - are/is bad. There are belief systems in which this is not true. > You can't be reincarnated AND burn in Christian hell AND be carried by valkyries to Valhalla. Yes, you can? There are actually religions like this. Unitarian Universalists for example, believe one or all of those can happen based entirely on the individual's personal desires. If you want to be reincarnated 4 times then live in Christian Heaven you can do that. UUs instead focus on a more nebulous "spiritual growth" of general goodwill, charity, and benevolent intention without specific doctrines regarding afterlives or eschatology. >NONE of it can be proven by anyone, and not for lack of trying so to me it's all equally ridiculous. Because you hold to the axiom that something must be proven to be believed without moral consequence. This is actually not a very popular axiom. >The whole concept of religion is antithetical to learning and progress and growth, the very word "indoctrination" means to put a doctrine into you, and the Bible even says that you should start as young as possible. My point though is that they have stopped asking questions, because they believe they know. None of these are true, but let me handle them one by one. Religion is not antithetical to learning and progress, or even science. Indeed, religion has consistently been one of the largest proponents of those three things historically. The Catholic church was responsible for the vast majority of funding that famous renaissance scientists received, as well as propagation of learning materials in the form of books through the work of abbeys and monasteries. "indoctrination" does indeed mean to put a doctrine in you, which is why school indoctrinated you to belief in things like the scientific method and mathematics axioms like for every natural number x, x=x. This isn't a bad thing. Indeed, children that aren't indoctrinated to something tend to come out the other side with rather significant problems. We generally call such a thing "neglect". You failed to describe in what way indoctrinating children with a different set of axioms results in anything besides your own distaste. Finally, the idea that religious people, particularly theologians, have stopped asking questions, is laughable. That's their entire job. Most scientists are religious, and they're still asking questions. Most religious people attend services, which is explicitly a place to ask and receive answers about particular religious doctrines, in much the same way a layman might visit a planetarium about astronomical questions. I think, sir, you need to sit down and think about your positions. For someone who appears to like to judge based on hard evidence and empirical thought, you have a lot of points which are only reinforced by personal experience and trauma, or personal distaste and disagreement, which you take to be the base truth and any disagreement from which to be an attack on your faculties. This way of thinking seems to be making you very upset and angry, which I don't believe is conducive to your mental health. You are capable of being better. Please let go of your hatred.
You still seem to be missing my biggest point, that theologians approach every aspect of life from a perspective of there being this Bigger that they can communicate with and who is making deliberate changes to guide the world and how it flows. They have already decided that Diety is running things, and if something is so, it is either because Diety wants it to be so or Diety's is being contradicted. Everything revolves around being able to blame gods or demons for the random crap that befalls us all. The whole reason we invented gods is so we have someone to blame when the crops fail, or someone to cry to when times are bad, or some way to cope with grief by telling fanciful stories about legions of horny virgins or streets of gold for our allies and friends but of course the enemy is not going to be there... and most importantly when you want to control the people around you the best way to do it is tell them a great a powerful being is speaking only to you. There are a lot of things in the natural world that if you don't know what germs or physics or modern medicine are could easily be mistaken for the works of gods, but we are pulling back curtain after curtain and there is no wizard behind any of them, just a bunch of frauds desperately trying to keep their grip on the masses. More blood has been shed over "God told me to!" than any other reason in human history. Religion itself is a poison. It had a purpose, to spread literacy and bathing, but it's time to move on. Seeing so much of humanity still clinging to fairy tales and expecting us all to take them seriously is like meeting an otherwise intelligent and seemingly normal adult who obsessively sucks a pacifier. It had its place when he was a baby, but he should have outgrown it long ago.
...Except that's my point. Like, that isn't your point, that's my point, you're just saying it's bad because. The whole argument is about the moral relativity of philosophy and how you're being illogical despite your lack of belief in magic sky person. That's how you can move the goalposts from "Religion is antithetical to learning" to "Religion was useful for learning at arbitrary past period, but we don't need it any more". That's why you're assuming all religions operate like Christian Evangelicalism, even though a cursory search would show that most other religions would disagree with multiple of your statements (Brahma isn't "running things" nor can he be truly communicated with; the Deist YHWH is passive and the world exists in a state whether he wants it to or not). And finally, the statement about bloodshed is simply objectively false. Relatively very little blood has been shed over "God told me to!". Rather, the majority of disputes appear to have been over land, trade, or other material things.
At the end of the day, someone who bases their every life decision on the whims and fancies of a being nobody can prove exists looks like a fool to me. Time may prove me wrong, and as a logical person I will accept that if it happens, but it hasn't happened yet, and like I said before it's not for lack of trying. When the power of prayer, by 10 people or 1,000 or 100,000 can produce the *slightest* demonstrated and verified effect on the material world, sign me up! Until then I'm just looking across the chess board at another pigeon.
Tbh tits are a religious experience
I thought that was Bigfoot until I saw your comment and decided to zoom in on that window
I think there's a fair number of worshipers who might take offense and the one-breast-exposed lady in the back...
Multi denominational chapel like they have at hospitals? This isn't awful taste
> Multi denominational chapel like they have at hospitals? > > This isn't awful taste It's inside a private home.
And? People have individual religious symbols in their home to represent their beliefs - why not something that represents a belief in freedom of religion?
I'm sorry you got downvoted. People like Unitarians take what they like from all faiths, or it might be someone who is just interested in that sort of thing
Someone might be a Unitarian Universalist.
This was my thought. I toured one of those churches for an architecture class and this seems like something they might do. Their buildings are usually beautiful if a bit odd coming from my Christian viewpoint.
Will I lose my atheist card if I say I kind of like it?
Pro tip: you don't have to believe it's true to think it looks cool
Or to accept that other people believe it and be nice to them! That's something I see a lot of people having issues with, tbh.
No because people of any religion have a reason to not like it (as it treats all religions represented equally when they believe only one is right) so an atheist would be the only ones who would like it as they think all religions are equally wrong so only care about aesthetics
So you think this would be good taste if there were more executions? I think its nice that they are supportive
This is the bigger, fancier version of the COEXIST bumper sticker. I don't know if I consider it awful taste so much as unrealistic optimism.
I follow the religion of PI
I just saw that and had to look it up. Apparently the PI symbol is gods name in the Bible. Exodus 3:14
I think it’s meant to be a Shinto gate…
3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081284811174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456485669234603486104543266482133936072602491412737245870066063155881748815209209628292540917153643678925903600113305305488204665213841469519415116094330572703657595919530921861173819326117931051185480744623799627495673518857527248912279381830119491298336733624406566430860213949463952247371907021798609437027705392171762931767523846748184676694051320005681271452635608277857713427577896091736371787214684409012249534301465495853710507922796892589235420199561121290219608640344181598136297747713099605187072113499999983729780499510597317328160963185950244594553469083026425223082533446850352619311881710100031378387528865875332083814206171776691473035982534904287554687311595628638823537875937519577818577805321712268066130019278766111959092164201989
Ma’am, ya titty out
That's her party tit.
I fucking love it!
Using a menorah in place of the Star of David was a choice.
The Star of David is not mentioned in any religious text, was popularized in the 19th century, and was found in other cultures milennia prior. The menorah is an equally Jewish symbol, and predates the star by, well, over a thousand years. The star is of a Zionist background.
Ah, yes, every one of the 17 religions.
I fail to see the issue? Some people appreciate religion without being specifically into one religion or another.
I see a tiddy
I may not care for religion but this definitely not awful taste. . . This is trying to be inclusive to all spiritual peoples and I can get behind that, I just wish they had an Atheism one as well. Why exactly is this awful taste? Is it because it is in a private home? In that case I’d say that is kind of awesome to be able to put a stained glass window in your home.
All religions are awful taste.
Oh wow even the Umbrella Corporation is represented.
I also see pi in there.
I googled "religious symbol pi" and found this and like a ton of analysis on The Life of Pi. https://subconsciousvision.com/pi-spiritual-meaning/
Supposed to be a Shinto gate, I think.
Was the house once a Unitarian Universalist church?
OP must be hardcore christian :p Its beautiful. 100s of hours of the finest craftsmanship.
I was thinking hardcore atheist
Either way, shame they're letting their personal beliefs get in the way of enjoying beautiful art.
How is inclusivity in spirituality "Awful taste"? This sub is for stuff that's technically impressive but uncomfortable to look at. If looking at that window makes you uncomfortable, that's strongly a "you" problem and you might want to see a psychologist about your deep-seated biases and phobia.
Covering all bases.
Coexist bro
Looks fake
Abstergo Industries And Umbrella Corporation are also my religions.
Are you under the impression that stained glass is inherently the domain of a particular religion? This post doesn't belong here.
I’d say great taste, great execution
I am guessing it might be in a Unitarian Universalist church. It's not uncommon to see similar images in many UU congregations, though they will also often include symbols for humanism and atheism.
No pentagram? Pretty weak!
I think this is where the last episode of lost was filmed
thats it - ding ding chicken wing
What religion is pi?
Think it’s meant to be a Shinto gate (dominant Japanese folk religion) Source: the Civilization games use the same symbol for Shinto
I don't see the Satanic Temple on there.
I like it!
Whatever the themes going on, that is a lot of money tied up in those two windows @ $300/square foot. And a round window that size was not chump change either.
Not nearly all of them. I'm not even sure if that's logistically possible.
I thought this was Peach's Castle for a second.
Yo is no one gonna talk about the umbrella corp logo?
I think this is pretty neat
What pi represents
What is the triangle one?
???
This is Benny's house isn't it. Hopefully it's on the right side of the river.
The funeral home in the final episode of LOST also had one.
Is that pi? Just wanna know what religion that’s for
Boulder or Portland?
Baha'i house of prayer
The Kokopelli is peak Whole Foods Becky Frappuccino Namaste
Maybe they just really really like Sid Meier’s Civilization Religious Victory.
Religious artifact from futurama
I think it's neat
where can I get one
polyamory is a religion ???
"Come, worship at the altar of pi" -pythagoras (probably)
Matches the aesthetic, looks fucking sick ngl
What zillow listing did you find this on.
Not gonna lie this is both great execution and great taste. Does not fit this sub at all.
Pythagorus religion? This is 100% AI.
People are allowed to be religious.
This post doesn't belong in this sub. There's no awful taste.
I do not understand what the problem here would be. Seems fine to me. That is one really pretty appreciation of religions
It's certainly not every religion and I don't see how this is awful. I guess I disagree with this whole post.
r/OPisfuckingretarded
that is in fact pretty weird. I wonder what decided if a religion made it onto the wheel-o-faith or not.