Blasphemous "P*** Jesus" exhibit shown at gallery in Texas

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cherripeeps
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sparkythedog said:
Has anyone considered that Jesus might find this artwork funny?

Jesus is always given attributes like infinite love or mercy, but I rarely ever hear about his infinite sense of humor. I’d think the Lord and Savior of the universe who is also the one omnipotent creator, God, would have the ability to laugh at himself from time to time.

If I were him, I’d certainly find it funny.
Click to expand...
What is funny about it?
 
Sparkythedog said:
Has anyone considered that Jesus might find this artwork funny?

Jesus is always given attributes like infinite love or mercy, but I rarely ever hear about his infinite sense of humor. I’d think the Lord and Savior of the universe who is also the one omnipotent creator, God, would have the ability to laugh at himself from time to time.

If I were him, I’d certainly find it funny.
Click to expand...
I can only say, had he blasphemed against the Islamic god, Muslims would surely not find it funny.

Let’s not talk about the God we cannot see but talk about us - that we can. Christian teaching is, if we love God we would love each other. Insulting and blaspheming one’s God that is held deeply in one’s heart is not love.
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
Blasphemy isn’t funny.

Does this person keep repeating this stunt? I remember hearing about it years ago.

How sad.
Click to expand...
Hi Mary Gail,

I went to read up about him, since I was not familiar with him.

This seems to be the method that he uses in all of his various works, where he works with bodily fluids of different types.

So you could say that he does keep repeating this style or method in some way, from what I understand of it.
 
DeniseNY said:
What is funny about it?
Click to expand...
A man puts a crudely made plastic crucifix in a jar of his own urine and takes a photograph in 1987. He gets it displayed in multiple art galleries, received death threats because of it, has it vandalised beyond repair, and 30 years later we’re still talking about it.

How is that not funny?
 
Reuben_J said:
I can only say, had he blasphemed against the Islamic god, Muslims would surely not find it funny.

Let’s not talk about the God we cannot see but talk about us - that we can. Christian teaching is, if we love God we would love each other. Insulting and blaspheming one’s God that is held deeply in one’s heart is not love.
Click to expand...
Christians apparently didn’t find it funny either. Both the gallery owners and the artist recieved threats of violence and retribution. Even in this thread, one post stated that, “…in the end, Our Lord will have the last word.” (Whatever that might imply. :confused:)

But I’m not talking about fragile human sensibilities. I’m talking about the infinite God of all creation who’s one weakness, if his followers are to be believed, is that he just can’t handle someone taking a photo of a plastic icon immersed in urine (an essential bodily fluid BTW).

I’m just saying that I would give a being of infinite power and knowledge more credit than that.
 
Sparkythedog said:
Christians apparently didn’t find it funny either. Both the gallery owners and the artist recieved threats of violence and retribution. Even in this thread, one post stated that, “…in the end, Our Lord will have the last word.” (Whatever that might imply. :confused:)

But I’m not talking about fragile human sensibilities. I’m talking about the infinite God of all creation who’s one weakness, if his followers are to be believed, is that he just can’t handle someone taking a photo of a plastic icon immersed in urine (an essential bodily fluid BTW).

I’m just saying that I would give a being of infinite power and knowledge more credit than that.
Click to expand...
I meant what I said in my post - to love God is to love one another. In simple human term, to love one another is not to hurt his feeling unnecessarily. Seen from this perspective, the artist’s action is not act of love. But that may not make sense to you.

As for God, I really do not know what He thinks when someone’s blasphemed against him. I am not privy to God’s heart.

Probably one can deduce from the little one knows about God (through His word and revelation). Basically, God is to be loved and worship, which are His commandment. Those who don’t, are against Him, and therefore His enemies. They would not be with Him in His Kingdom. And that could only mean in the Devil’s.

I guess that’s what they meant when it is said, “Our Lord will have the last word.”
 
Sparkythedog said:
But I’m not talking about fragile human sensibilities. I’m talking about the infinite God of all creation who’s one weakness, if his followers are to be believed, is that he just can’t handle someone taking a photo of a plastic icon immersed in urine (an essential bodily fluid BTW).
Click to expand...
He can handle it. That is what Hell is for. It is not the weakness of God, but his strength, that he was willing to give people the freedom to act apart from his will, even if it was an act of defiance against him and an insult to the greatest act of love every known.

And Sparky, yes urine is a bodily fluid, but it is more. If one were to use a bodily fluid for a symbol of the crucifixion, then blood, or tears, would have been more meaningful.

By the way, most of us are old enough to recognize your posts for what they are, make no mistake. No one here has made threats. That is a straw man. I hope you learn some time that this intolerance that results in belittling the core beliefs of others is not the way to go through life. It is a way to troll the internet. Life, however, is harder than cyberspace, as you no doubt will learn some day. The one positive you presence here has been is as an illustration that for all the bluster of Christian intolerance, more often than not, it is the anti-christians who have the greatest intolerance.
 
Sparkythedog said:
The ability to find humor in everything - including something as absurd as a photo of a plastic crucifix in a jar of urine.
Click to expand...
Nope. Not the definition of infinite humor.

And even if it were, then that would mean that God would find humor in this, and that would indicate a defect in his nature, and then that wouldn’t be God.

Also, I am curious if you think that the artist intended his work to be humorous and absurd?
 
pnewton said:
He can handle it. That is what Hell is for. It is not the weakness of God, but his strength, that he was willing to give people the freedom to act apart from his will, even if it was an act of defiance against him and an insult to the greatest act of love every known.

And Sparky, yes urine is a bodily fluid, but it is more. If one were to use a bodily fluid for a symbol of the crucifixion, then blood, or tears, would have been more meaningful.

By the way, most of us are old enough to recognize your posts for what they are, make no mistake. No one here has made threats. That is a straw man. I hope you learn some time that this intolerance that results in belittling the core beliefs of others is not the way to go through life. It is a way to troll the internet. Life, however, is harder than cyberspace, as you no doubt will learn some day. The one positive you presence here has been is as an illustration that for all the bluster of Christian intolerance, more often than not, it is the anti-christians who have the greatest intolerance.
Click to expand...
You illustrate my point better than I ever could hope to do.
 
Sparkythedog said:
A man puts a crudely made plastic crucifix in a jar of his own urine and takes a photograph in 1987. He gets it displayed in multiple art galleries, received death threats because of it, has it vandalised beyond repair, and 30 years later we’re still talking about it.

How is that not funny?
Click to expand...
Because it was blasphemous then, it’s blasphemous now, and it will always be blasphemous.

So I guess what you’re saying is blasphemy is just funny?
 
PRmerger said:
Nope. Not the definition of infinite humor.

And even if it were, then that would mean that God would find humor in this, and that would indicate a defect in his nature, and then that wouldn’t be God.

Also, I am curious if you think that the artist intended his work to be humorous and absurd?
Click to expand...
I don’t know what the artist intended or if there was any intended meaning at all. In my opinion art should elicit thoughts and emotions on its own. To spoon feed the viewer artistic intent cheapens the experience. (IMHO)

As for the humor in the Castro kidnappings here’s what I find funny (It’s a bit blue but here goes):

In the minds of some Christians, it acceptable that an all powerful, all knowing, all compassionate God doesn’t lift a celestial finger to prevent 3 girls from being kidnapped and tortured for 10 years. But they believe he gets real angry when someone makes a strange picture. It’s a dark comedy but comedy none the less.
 
DeniseNY said:
Because it was blasphemous then, it’s blasphemous now, and it will always be blasphemous.

So I guess what you’re saying is blasphemy is just funny?
Click to expand...
You miss my point. IMO the actual photo is “meh” at best. The humor is in the reaction.
 
Taking the religious and morality issues out of it completely, why would this even be considered art to begin with? anyone over the age of 10 could create this same piece in about 5 minutes on any given day.
 
Hey there, Sparky!

If I may, here’s my contribution to the conversation, and the way I read these incidents:

I think an orthodox Catholic interpretation would point us to the conclusion that God is deeply grieved that someone would place a crucifix in urine and take a photo of it to be held up as art. Here’s why: You rightly say that urine is a natural bodily fluid. However, humans have the capacity to embed symbolic meanings into things. Tears, for instance, have a different symbolic meaning than urine. Throughout the centuries, humans have urinated on people or things which they find contemptible. Urinating on someone or something is an act meant to denigrate the person or the that the object stands for. It may be that other meanings for urine are possible in other cultures, but I’m pretty certain that anyone, from any culture would be quite upset if the icons that represent their gods were soaked in urine.

As you also point out, God is all-powerful and the integrity of his person cannot be compromised in any way by the “***** Jesus” exhibit in itself. However, through Revelation we know that God is love, God loves humans infinitely, and he desires that humanity correspond to his love in kind, though he makes us free not to do so. Immersing a crucifix in urine, as stated above, is an act of grievous disrespect toward the symbol and the sacred person whom it represents. I think any father would be profoundly saddened if their child immersed his photo in their urine and distributed pictures of the resulting image. God’s pain, however, is greater, because God not only brought us into existence; he also laid down his own life for us, that we may be restored to eternal communion with him. And in the face of such overwhelming, self-giving love, humans often respond with acts of great ingratitude, as in the case of the “***** Jesus” exhibit. Blasphemy always saddens and grieves God’s infinitely loving heart, for the same reason that being insulted and reviled by their own children would wound the hearts of most parents.

I also wanted to respond to this statement you made:
As for the humor in the Castro kidnappings here’s what I find funny (It’s a bit blue but here goes):
Click to expand...
In the minds of some Christians, it acceptable that an all powerful, all knowing, all compassionate God doesn’t lift a celestial finger to prevent 3 girls from being kidnapped and tortured for 10 years. But they believe he gets real angry when someone makes a strange picture. It’s a dark comedy but comedy none the less.
Click to expand...
You are referring to what is more formally known as the problem of evil. If God is all powerful, all knowing, and all compassionate, why are little girls kidnapped, raped, tortured, and killed? For that matter, why does anyone have to undergo any kind of suffering or unjust treatment at the hands of another human being?

The problem of evil is a deep philosophical issue. If you’re interested, I’d definitely recommend downloading Jimmy Akin’s “The Greatest Scandal of All”, which is a conference focused on precisely this issue. A long-form resource that I’d like to recommend would be Trent Horn’s Answering Atheism, which is a survey work that systematically reviews and challenges the most common arguments that atheists and agnostics put forth against theism, including the problem of evil. You can also PM me and I’d be delighted to debate with you about that.

But the short answer that God is not okay with acts of great injustice and cruelty, such as the one you mention. God hates evil and injustice, and he also hates blasphemy. God has commanded his children on earth to, firstly, not to engage in cruel or unjust behavior; and secondly, to take a stand against injustice when it does happen, because he desires to institute order in the world through out free cooperation. But even when injustice goes uncorrected on earth through human faults, ultimately no one can escape the hand of God, and he will institute definitive and eternal justice for every single one of us at the end of our lives.

Gotta run now. Be well!
 
Cherripeeps said:
The problem of evil is a deep philosophical issue. If you’re interested, I’d definitely recommend downloading Jimmy Akin’s “The Greatest Scandal of All”, which is a conference focused on precisely this issue.
Click to expand...
Peter Kreeft does a great job as well, but this isn’t the apologetics forum. I suspected when I read that last post there was a little theist baiting going on. Riling people up to find humor in their reaction is not the act of an adult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top