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

[josie_L]

Again, let me clarify. I find the idea that God is offended absurd. Of course people will be offended if you put their favorite symbol on urine. (BTW side note: if that was the actual color of Serrano’s urine, I hope he went to see a doctor)

Anyways, people get offended over anything. But they keep saying that Jesus or God is offended. First, how do they know that? And second, why would God be offended? This is the same God who created the universe. What would he care if someone put a plastic likeness of Himself in slightly tainted water.

That would be like if a mouse made a picture of my mother out of its own feces. I wouldn’t be offended or angry - maybe slightly intrigued.

What are human symbols of disgust to an infinite being.** It seems to me like people are ascribing their feeling to God**.

To an extent you are right, but it really all depends on the motives of the artist in question, i.e, only God really knows why he did what he did, but if the reasons for that were to insult Him and his followers, which is a form of hate and/or intolerance, then I don’t think God would be happy about said action.

I agree that God is “big” enough to accept insults thrown at Him, but recollect the commandment:

“Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.”

I’d be careful if I was you.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

That would be like if a mouse made a picture of my mother out of its own feces. I wouldn’t be offended or angry - maybe slightly intrigued.

What are human symbols of disgust to an infinite being. It seems to me like people are ascribing their feeling to God.

I think a better metaphor for understanding the reaction may be to imagine of someone took a picture of someone else’s loved one and put it on public display and such a manner. Even if the loved one is indifferent to it others in the loved one’s life might still be upset. Or if we were to imagine the same scenario with a deceased loved one the deceased would have no feelings about it, but the survivors of the deceased would be upset.

 

[Entwhistler]

I’m talking about God, not people. Going back to my original question: Why is God offended?

You lost me with this one.

Uh, I actually agree with you that God is not “offended”. I though I said that. It obviously impossible to ascribe human feelings to God. People do so to illustrate something about God. A more accurate emotion would be sadness for humanity since they have forgotten their Creator (I believe we have been over this before).

The analogy was supposed to illustrate how some atheists see theism. Just as a man who believes he has an imaginary friend. It was supposed to show that finding humor in Will’s reaction is akin to finding humor in the Christian’s reaction to the jar of urine. But that topic, which you originally popped into this forum with, seems to have been left behind. But what is your beef with the entire ordeal? It can’t be that it’s funny. It might be amazement that God is offended by it but, as I said, theologically, he isn’t. I agree with you on that. Is it that other Christians describe him as offended? That could be a gripe but when something you care for dearly has been used in such a way, you can’t blame them much for exaggerating slightly.

 

[Sparkythedog]

I think a better metaphor for understanding the reaction may be to imagine of someone took a picture of someone else’s loved one and put it on public display and such a manner. Even if the loved one is indifferent to it others in the loved one’s life might still be upset. Or if we were to imagine the same scenario with a deceased loved one the deceased would have no feelings about it, but the survivors of the deceased would be upset.

I agree with the loved one analogy but for Christians, God is far from dead. Not only is He alive he is the most powerful being you could possibly know. A better analogy would be someone insulted your relative who is also a heavyweight boxing champion in their prime.

My point was not that people shouldn’t be upset. It was questioning if God would actually be insulted. Apparently the answer is a definitive “yes”.

 

[Reuben_J]

I think a better metaphor for understanding the reaction may be to imagine of someone took a picture of someone else’s loved one and put it on public display and such a manner. Even if the loved one is indifferent to it others in the loved one’s life might still be upset. Or if we were to imagine the same scenario with a deceased loved one the deceased would have no feelings about it, but the survivors of the deceased would be upset.

To be fair, that is close.

Christians relationship with God, of course is for the Christians to know and feel, others would not know but make assumption, is like a parent and child, to put it mildly and simply. It is of course deeper than that.

So, it is a good analogy, for want of a better one.

Now, I will say this again. Christians will not take any drastic action against this artist like killing him bar any unexpected one.

The reason is obvious - God can definitely take care of Himself. Christians are His people, His children and not his enemies. His enemies, on the other hand, will have no place in His eternal Kingdom.

The repercussion for being the enemy of God is to be experienced on the last day, which would be eternal in nature.

 

[PRmerger]

The repercussion for being the enemy of God is to be experienced on the last day, which would be eternal in nature.

And if there is anything of certainty it is this: there will, indeed, be a last day. For every single person.

 

[Thom18]

I do wonder about the mentality of anyone who considers this “art”

There was a leak in the ceiling at my high school a few years ago, so maintenance put a trash can underneath to catch the water. My teacher wrote “modern art” on a piece of paper and stuck it to the can because that’s what he said art has become.

We live in a world where people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for “invisible art”, so the idea of someone putting a crucifix in a jar of urine and playing it off as “art” isn’t such a stretch.

 

[Thom18]

On topic: I remember reading about this a year or few ago. I’m just as disgusted by it now as I was then. Obviously the artist can hide behind the fact that he calls this “art”, but I also remember a certain event in a certain state a few years ago dedicated to drawing a certain religious figure (it shouldn’t be hard to guess which one I’m referring to). Two gunmen came with the intention of killing the artists. The MSM and much of the public (or, at least, those who cared to comment on Facebook about it) didn’t think they were “allowed” to hide behind their art and essentially said that they asked for it.

There’s a different attitude depending on whose image it is being desecrated.

 

[Ghosty]

Christ experienced worse in His own Holy flesh.

Best not get incensed over the matter, in my opinion.

 

[pnewton]

Christ experienced worse in His own Holy flesh.

Best not get incensed over the matter, in my opinion.

And the one who betrayed him to that suffering he said it would have been better for him if he had never been born. Then we have the way he treated the one who touched the Ark of the Covenant.

Sure, he has seen worse sin, but we also have Sodom and Gommorah. Be not deceived. God is not mocked. What a man sows, he shall reap. This faux artist best prepare or be reaped.

 

[Ghosty]

And the one who betrayed him to that suffering he said it would have been better for him if he had never been born. Then we have the way he treated the one who touched the Ark of the Covenant.

Sure, he has seen worse sin, but we also have Sodom and Gommorah. Be not deceived. God is not mocked. What a man sows, he shall reap. This faux artist best prepare or be reaped.

Leave it to God. This artist is someone who is familiar with the concept of blasphemy, and they will be liable for it before God. I see no reason to get my hackles up over it beyond finding it distasteful.