Church of Scientology Slams Nude Tom Cruise "Publicity Stunt"

OutToe83

Patron with Honors
You've obviously been spoiled DeeAnna.

:coolwink:

I don't get this at all!? Strat, Flunk and DeeAnna are right! There is nothing "well-hung" about this image.

First of all: "Well-hung" refers to a guy's erect size--ironically, since it isn't "hanging" when he's erect; it's "standing" (or "leaning" if the guy happens to be older). But nobody can tell how well-hung this guy is or isn't: His penis isn't erect! The size of a flaccid penis is not proportional to its erect size. There's a LOT of variation of that ratio from one individual to the next. You have to see the penis erect to tell its erect size.

Second, and not very important: I concur with FlunkYou and DeeAnna: His flaccid size isn't that impressive either. Maybe the commentator has led a sheltered life...?
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
I don't get this at all!? Strat, Flunk and DeeAnna are right! There is nothing "well-hung" about this image.

First of all: "Well-hung" refers to a guy's erect size--ironically, since it isn't "hanging" when he's erect; it's "standing" (or "leaning" if the guy happens to be older). But nobody can tell how well-hung this guy is or isn't: His penis isn't erect! The size of a flaccid penis is not proportional to its erect size. There's a LOT of variation of that ratio from one individual to the next. You have to see the penis erect to tell its erect size.

Second, and not very important: I concur with FlunkYou and DeeAnna: His flaccid size isn't that impressive either. Maybe the commentator has led a sheltered life...?

Quite right! And as the less well-endowed of us males will tell you, it's not what you've got but what you do with it that counts!

:coolwink:
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
I don't get this at all!? Strat, Flunk and DeeAnna are right! There is nothing "well-hung" about this image.

First of all: "Well-hung" refers to a guy's erect size--ironically, since it isn't "hanging" when he's erect; it's "standing" (or "leaning" if the guy happens to be older). But nobody can tell how well-hung this guy is or isn't: His penis isn't erect! The size of a flaccid penis is not proportional to its erect size. There's a LOT of variation of that ratio from one individual to the next. You have to see the penis erect to tell its erect size.

Second, and not very important: I concur with FlunkYou and DeeAnna: His flaccid size isn't that impressive either. Maybe the commentator has led a sheltered life...?

Maybe he's stretcher not a stander.

But what's being displayed in it's floppy state is not making me feel weak in the knees.
 

Victoria

Patron Meritorious
I don't get this at all!? Strat, Flunk and DeeAnna are right! There is nothing "well-hung" about this image.

First of all: "Well-hung" refers to a guy's erect size--ironically, since it isn't "hanging" when he's erect; it's "standing" (or "leaning" if the guy happens to be older). But nobody can tell how well-hung this guy is or isn't: His penis isn't erect! The size of a flaccid penis is not proportional to its erect size. There's a LOT of variation of that ratio from one individual to the next. You have to see the penis erect to tell its erect size.

Second, and not very important: I concur with FlunkYou and DeeAnna: His flaccid size isn't that impressive either. Maybe the commentator has led a sheltered life...?

Well, well, things Mama didn't tell us about penises;)
 

Rmack

Van Allen Belt Sunbather
LOL, I didn't read the comments immediately preceding my post, or I would have re-worded it.

OK, I'll throw in my take;

All I can say is I'm a grower not a show-er, so I can confirm earlier comments.
 

Victoria

Patron Meritorious
I just hope there is just one Miscavige buttplug in his collection.
Hell I'd even commission it to him.

Quoting myself... Life is good, haha.
I have made the COB buttplug.

It really needs to be painted, with all the little flourishes.
Without accenting unfortunately all you can barely make out is his lovely pompadour.
Think I should fix it up and send it to the gallery?

I must admit, this is my first ever butt plug, I didn't even know what one was until the LRH version came out, lol.

If anyone wants it PM me.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    37.5 KB · Views: 29
Quoting myself... Life is good, haha.
I have made the COB buttplug.

It really needs to be painted, with all the little flourishes.
Without accenting unfortunately all you can barely make out is his lovely pompadour.
Think I should fix it up and send it to the gallery?

I must admit, this is my first ever butt plug, I didn't even know what one was until the LRH version came out, lol.

If anyone wants it PM me.

When you paint it, you can choose to use lead-based paint, and that way, the user will end up as insane as the person the butt plug represents.

Or you could cast it in copper, with a wire running down the leg, attached to heel plates in the shoe. I've forgotten what that will do for the user, but I think DM could explain.
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
The shroud of Turin was fraudulently fabricated in the middle ages to promote Catholicism.

The symbolism of the artist is impressive.
 

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
I wouldn't wear the Cross art piece they put on his chest... too big and ostentatious - bad taste :no:

But the other piece of art..I certainly would wear it , nice fine art MEST body piece,
no ostentatious at all :yes:
Beautiful !


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • tomcruise-pendant.jpg
    tomcruise-pendant.jpg
    23.6 KB · Views: 68
Last edited:

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
The shroud of Turin was fraudulently fabricated in the middle ages to promote Catholicism.

The symbolism of the artist is impressive.

This is what few scientists have said!

Last week I've seen a documentary about it, It was asked 3-4 teams of experts in ancient artefacts to reproduce the shroud of Turin process as if it was a false artefact produced in the middle age.
The were amazed at the most probable conclusion they came to as thy were certain the shroud was produced just before of afetre Christ. They know it by the process used and how it aged...


I don't have any opinion but it was very interesting to watch it and how they were amazed at their discovery... :confused2:
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Art Info: Q&A: Daniel Edwards Explains His Naked Tom Cruise Sculpture

http://blogs.artinfo.com/artintheai...ards-explains-his-naked-tom-cruise-sculpture/

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Last week, artist Daniel Edwards made national news when it was revealed that he had created a rendering of Tom Cruise, measuring approximately 14 feet by 3 feet, which features the actor holding a biblical cross that points down to his notably large testicles and penis. Called the “Shroud of Scientology,” it is meant to celebrate Cruise’s 25-year commitment to the church. Edwards plans to exhibit the work, in conjunction with Cory Allen Contemporary Art, at a pop-up gallery near the church’s headquarters in Clearwater, Florida, beginning on August 8.

Edwards is no stranger to controversy — he once made a sculpture of Britney Spears giving birth on all fours, a bust of presidential hopeful Hilary Clinton topless. But gently mocking pop stars and politicians is different than poking fun at the famously litigious Church of Scientology. ARTINFO reached out to Edwards via email to ask him a few questions about his latest eye-opener.

You’ve said this was a commission, but what interested you about Tom Cruise and the Church of Scientology?
I think Tom Cruise’s success has always been an interest for me. I used to think the Church of Scientology was behind a certain amount of his success, which was intriguing to me, but I don’t think that is the case. I think he is a huge success despite his connection to the church. It is all a mystery to me, really, and I have even less of an opinion about it now, than I did before.

Did you have much knowledge of the Church of Scientology before making this work?
I don’t think I’ve ever been too knowledgeable about the Church of Scientology. I see what the media reports, I’ve seen South Park’s depictions and commentaries, which are brilliant. I have not seen the HBO documentary.

How do you feel about the focus that has been placed on “well-endowed” aspect of the sculpture?
I’m happy about that! I spent a lot of time sculpting that part of the sculpture — almost as much time as I spent sculpting his portrait. It was inspired by Michelangelo’s David, which is always criticized for being so small. I offered to teach a course in sculpting genitalia at the New York Academy of Art (they turned it down). And I’m happy that a work of art is talked about for its objectification of the male nude, instead of the female nude, for a change.

How would you respond to people who claim this is merely a publicity stunt?
Well, it would depend on who said it, I suppose. The church of Scientology said it was a publicity stunt, and they are the masters of publicity. But if a random Internet viewer said it, I might dismiss the comment. This piece has its relevance — maybe I haven’t spoken about what that is, and maybe I’ve even applied some misdirection in regard, but I would say that it is more than a publicity stunt.

Are you nervous the Church or Cruise himself might respond with some kind of legal action?
I’m not so nervous about that. I think my work is friendly — it may have an edge, but it is mostly respectful.

Do you hope that Tom Cruise will be able to see the work?
I do hope he will see the work. I know he’ll never have a better relief portrait sculpted of him, so he should be paying attention to that aspect.

—Craig Hubert (@craighubert)


* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *
 

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
This is what few scientists have said!

Last week I've seen a documentary about it, It was asked 3-4 teams of experts in ancient artefacts to reproduce the shroud of Turin process as if it was a false artefact produced in the middle age.
The were amazed at the most probable conclusion they came to as thy were certain the shroud was produced just before of afetre Christ. They know it by the process used and how it aged...


I don't have any opinion but it was very interesting to watch it and how they were amazed at their discovery... :confused2:
The radio carbon dating of the shroud in the late 1980s dated it, according to wiki as around the time of the middle ages, the same time it appeared in France.

An article which purports to be a free copy of the original article in nature is posted here.

The documentary you posted is due to research conducted by Giulio Fanti in an Italian University called Padua. There is an interesting article in the Huffington Post here.

Some telling quotes from the article include these.

This is a quote from Giulio Fanti.

"For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs."

...

Fanti has written several papers about the shroud, including one in 2011 that hypothesized how radiation could have caused the image of a man's bloody face and body to appear on the cloth.

This demonstrates he has a bias and he is open about it.

Also, per the quote below he has a book and a very timely commercial release of it - just before Easter.

Fanti's book, Il Mistero della Sindone (translated to The Mystery of the Shroud) , co-authored by journalist Saverio Gaeta, was released ahead of the Easter holiday, as Christians around the world prepare to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus.

It also states that

The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D., per The Telegraph.

So at best it is centuries after his death.

The official position from the Vatican is that it is not an official relic but an icon At the same time, Pope Francis gave an introduction to the documentary you saw when it first screened in Italy.

The Vatican wants to insinuate and that it is a scientific evidence but is forced to call it a religious relic, for fear of being called frauds. It's like Scientology with the e-meter. They insinuate that it is a scientific instrument but their official position is that it is a religious relic.

Apparently, this has been debunked more than once now, including shortly after its discovery in the middle ages. The best skeptical article I've seen on it is here.

A relevant excerpt is here.
The bottom line on the Shroud remains the same: the Shroud continues to fail several key practical tests, as discussed by skeptical investigator Joe Nickell in his classic work on the subject, Looking for a Miracle:2

Provenance: there is no sign that this object existed before the 14th century;
Art history: the Shroud fits into art history as part of a genre of artistic depictions and recreations of burial cloths of Christ;
Style: the image upon the shroud looks like a manufactured illustration consistent with 14th century religious iconography, not like a real human being;
Circumstance: a 14th century Catholic bishop determined that the Shroud was a “cunningly painted” fraud—and discovered the artist who confessed to creating it;
Chemistry: the Shroud contains red ochre and other paint pigments;
Radiometric dating: carbon-14 dating tests showed in 1988 that the Shroud was likely created between 1260 and 1390 CE. In 2008, the hypothesis that this date was distorted by carbon monoxide contamination was tested—and results of the original tests confirmed.

Overturning the robustly supported conclusion that the Shroud was manufactured by a medieval artist would take extraordinary levels of evidence in favor of some alternate explanation. The current media hype carries no such breakthrough news. The opposite is true, in fact: the Italian researchers concede (as quoted by Vatican Insider) that their “inability to repeat (and therefore falsify) the image on the Shroud makes it impossible to formulate a reliable hypothesis on how the impression was made.”

You will notice that no one in the scientific community is interested in this. It is not referenced by other academics. There is no controversy.

The Vatican has a huge PR problem right now. Their last Pope has to resign because of an impending arrest warrant over his covering up of child sexual abuse.

In April 2011 Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens began a campaign to have Pope Benedict arrested.

In December 2011, Giulia Fanti did his first 'research'

The arrest warrant was issued in February 2013. At the same time, an unnamed European Nation was planning to take a lien against the assets of the Church.

The documentary was released in Easter 2013.

Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett have both insinuated that the Vatican may pop like a bubble. I wonder whether or not they are privy to some information. Europe's economy could easily use their wealth.
 

SonatheFixer

Patron with Honors
Hollywood Reporter: Church of Scientology Slams Nude Tom Cruise "Publicity Stunt"

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/nude-tom-cruise-scientology-slams-812246

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

scientology_split_h_15.jpg



by Katie Wilson Berg 7/30/2015 1:23pm PDT

The "Shroud of Scientology" exists "as a document of Tom Cruise's faith in Scientology — a photo negative of the radiance of his soul," said the artist.

The Church of Scientology is distancing itself from an art exhibit purporting to be Scientology-related that features an image of a nude, well-endowed Tom Cruise.

"The Church has nothing to do with this publicity stunt, and any claim to the contrary is false," church spokesperson Karin Pouw tells The Hollywood Reporter.

The exhibit, scheduled to open on Aug. 8th at the Corey Allen Contemporary Art gallery in St. Petersburg, FL, was announced Wednesday via press release.

In celebration of Tom Cruise's 25th anniversary as a Scientologist, the release says, a "nude shroud of the actor" will be unveiled in a "Pop-Up Church of Scientology" at the gallery, which is located near the church's headquarters in Clearwater Florida. The image was created by artist Daniel Edwards.

Neither Corey Allen, founder of the gallery, nor Edwards is a Scientologist. Allen tells THR that they had "sought sanction for the exhibit from the church but had not received a response."

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Oh goody.

Does this mean we can expect an impending crucifixion of Tom Cruise soon?

PM me for ringside tickets.
 
Top