Immodest Jesus statue riles Christians

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Methinks you are wrong.

It's not because muslims take offence, its because they want to kill and behead the person who dares write a cartoon. That is a far cry from just venting one's feelings.


Gah you're whining.

Want some cheese with it?




posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   
That image is not Jesus Christ... I am not offended by this. No image can match the form.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Methinks you are wrong.

It's not because muslims take offence, its because they want to kill and behead the person who dares write a cartoon. That is a far cry from just venting one's feelings.


Gah you're whining.

Want some cheese with it?

Typical!!


I totally render your point moot, so you respond with, well...nothing!
Way to contribute.

NEXT......

[edit on 12-1-2008 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by palehorse23
 


Most of us will turn the other cheek. Are points that important to you? You can have my points. Moderator?????????

These things are not art. That is the lie here. They are an intentional attack on Christians. If this was a piece attacking Muslims or Black People many here would change their tune. Most won't admit it but that does not make it any less true. Hate is a powerful emotion that rules peoples lives and makes them loose all sense of reality.

Hate is a bad thing whether you're a Christian or an Atheist. That phony art was created to express and create hate. It is what is wrong with our world and not part of what is right. Would you take your young child to see that? I would hope not.

Most Christians are kind decent people. The ones who are not, are not Christians. I can only apologize for the fake Christians who have made people hate us. Although I think many hate us for no reason.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
If this was a piece attacking Muslims or Black People many here would change their tune.

You are so totally correct.

Could you imagine the uproar if this was a statue demeaning blacks or muslims? Oh, the outrage.


[edit on 12-1-2008 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   
As an experiment, I'm going to make a statue of Mohammad just like this one. I wonder how long it will take for my house to be blown up. Or maybe one in the likeness of Hillary Clinton. Come on, we all know she has a you-know-what already. Or as someone mentioned, a black person. Will it still be considered art and freedom of expression?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by palehorse23
Religion to mean means living like Christ did.


Exactly
You get it

Anyone who does not try to do just that, is not a Christian.
Jesus died for us because we are incapable of doing this. We can do our best to do this however and that is what a Christian is.

I would have never posted this article for instance because I don't believe Jesus would have done that. Do you?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Palehorse does have a point in that we should not act like these others might. I think the real issue is that this object is on public display. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to ignore it. I think that would exhibit the best example.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
As an experiment, I'm going to make a statue of Mohammad just like this one.


I would hope you are not serious. That would be vindictive. I think part of the problem is that we as Christians have to be more careful with our words and actions. I know I'm guilty of un-Christian-like behavior at times. We all need to learn to hold our tongues better.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I would hope you are not serious.


I'm not remotely serious. Not only because I don't have an artistic bone in my body but mostly because it's not our call to "get even" or to "make a statement." He tells us to be still while He works. That's what I plan on doing.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by StormSolace
 


If I defecate on a pallet and put it in a museum and call it art; should that be protected as a form of expression?

Being an artist myself; nudity in art does not offend or bother me. What this piece is however is vulgarity and by no stretch of the truth is it art. In addition to that it is an expression of a mentally ill person who clearly needs help. Either that or it is an expression of hatred akin to that expressed by the KKK when it burns a cross on a Black Persons lawn. It is one or the other but not art.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


I knew that

I meant it tongue in cheek.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Could you image the uproar if this was a statue demeaning blacks or muslims? Oh, the outrage.


And that would be equally as stupid.

The difference, however, would be that certain people and their ilk wouldn't just be calling them stupid, but would be suggesting that they were being oversensitve and that it was tied into fundamentalism, that they were all as bad as each other and certain people would be suggesting that was good enough grounds to go bomb the crap out of them.

But at the end of the day, its a statue with a hard on, and getting upset about it is kinda laughable.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
But at the end of the day, its a statue with a hard on, and getting upset about it is kinda laughable.

Hey, everyone has their own mind and people are different from one another which means different people will find different things upsetting or disgusting.
I'm sure there is something you find upsetting or disgusting which someone else would consider laughable that you are upset.
To each their own.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Can I ask you if you even considered what the artist may have meant by portraying Jesus in this fashion, or did you just see the image and recoil in disgust, never considering what the artist's intent was?

Do you understand the purpose of art?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Rasobasi420
 


I don't think anyone is fooled by this sort of thing. The artist intended from the outset for this to offend the people it offended. It was to draw attention to himself and it of course works. Some nut will pay to much for it and be stuck with a work with no value when they try and sell it later on. That is also the intent of the artist. Some will lie and laud its value as true art but it will still be a lie. Timeless art makes you say "Wow" not "Yecch".



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Can I ask you if you even considered what the artist may have meant by portraying Jesus in this fashion, or did you just see the image and recoil in disgust, never considering what the artist's intent was?

Yes, you can ask.


Do you understand the purpose of art?

No, please explain it to me.

Just because someone says its art, that does not make it so.
You do understand some people hide behind the term 'art' right?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I don't think anyone is fooled by this sort of thing.


Exactly. It reminds me of that artist who created something that was later christened "The Urine Jesus" (I can't remember the exact name of it- I'm sure someone will know and can correct me). It is basically nothing more than Jesus on a crucifix in a jar of urine.

No, this is not art. This is purposely meant to inflame under the protection and guise of art. When they have to give an account for their actions, and they will, I don't think the excuse of "it is art!" will be accepted. Especially when God knows their true intentions even if we cannot.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Did Jesus have a penis?
Was this penis functional?

I would guess the answer to both questions is "yes" even in a beleif system where he's utterly perfect in every way - can't be perfect if you have a ken doll crotch or severe ED, right? Now maybe the mohel sneezed during the circumcision, but I doubt it.

Now these biological constants being true, it's entirely likely that Jesus got morning wood.

How is the fact that the guy's body was actually functional "demeaning"? Wrapping him up in a scanty diaper in every depiction of his mangling, torture, and execution isn't demeaning, but showing him how he probably looked when he got up in the morning is?

[edit on 12-1-2008 by TheWalkingFox]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
It's just shock-art that religious communities need to ignore.

Plenty of people get a kick out of insulting religion etc. Let them be.






top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join