>>18059549
What is even the point of this post? If you're going to depict the invisible God in a visual medium then there is going to have to be some concessions made. Michelangelo isn't the Bible, he has nothing to do with the discussion.
>>18059556
>>18059691
>so-called rational and logical atheists when asked to think outside of the bun:
Is this really the best that you have? Are you actually capable of metaphysical discussion or are you just canned snark all the way down?