Some guy in New York carved a statue of Jesus -- naked, 6 feet high -- out of chocolate, and titled it "My Sweet Lord" . It is scheduled to be displayed next week (Holy week). If you find this offensive, is it because he's naked, because he's made out of chocolate, or because of the title? The person who carved the statue declined to comment (in the article I read), so I have no idea if he meant to be offensive, or if he was trying to celebrate Jesus using his medium (he is an artist that works with food). Would it make a difference to your opinion either way?
2007-03-30 08:18:34 · 20 answers · asked by Ami 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The intent would certainly make a difference. I am . . . . mildly offput by the whole thing, but art is art. Not all art is comfortable to view. It seemed like it was, at worst, tongue in cheek and irreverent. Knowing that the guy was a 'food artist' does shed a different light on it though.
2007-03-30 08:24:07 · answer #1 · answered by LX V 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think he has too much times on his hands to do that. I would find it offensive since this guy has no idea what Jesus looks like unless He saw The Passion Of The Christ movie then he might have a idea what He looks like. I don't know why they would display that on Holy week as that would be offensive to any Christians who see it. It also could melt easily since it's all in chocolate.
2007-03-30 15:23:50 · answer #2 · answered by Josh D 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Are you kidding? Thats 200+ pounds of chocolate.
I wonder if these extreme christians would be more offended if it was made of butter, cheese or rice krispies?
You know whats really funny; these christian extremists will worship the back of a street sign, a piece of toast or a water stain in an underpass because it looks like Jesus or Mary but they get so f'in offended by a lifesize eatable statue. It's just chocolate, the food of the Gods.
2007-03-30 15:33:01 · answer #3 · answered by underpaid 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope, though the art in question may be silly or even crap. I happen to think the sculpture is beautiful.
I don't protest gallery openings because I disagree with the artist's ideas. I might as well picket a library.
Freedom of speech all the way!
2007-03-30 15:23:20 · answer #4 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Find out some of the "art" displayed by the National Endowment of the Arts
2007-03-30 15:28:45 · answer #5 · answered by robert p 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I don't think it's offensive. As a christian I know that guy does not know what Christ even looks like. You all probably seen the picture or several of them that may give you a some-what-of-a glimpse of what he might of look like. First of all I don't know what he looked like either. First of all he didn't have long hair. The artist painted pictures of what he might of or to show his divine nature or presence.
2007-03-30 15:41:32 · answer #6 · answered by ogre_110 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not offensive, just yummy. People need to stop their efforts to censor others unless true harm is being done. I see no harm in a chocolate Jesus.
2007-03-30 15:31:28 · answer #7 · answered by reverenceofme 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can think of no higher honor than having my likeness carved in chocolate!
People need to chill out about things like this. It's just silly to think your Gods would be so easily offended as to object to showing up in all their unclothed glory and dipped/carved of chocolate. (Odin would laugh if it happened to him, I bet!)
~Morg~
2007-03-30 15:23:32 · answer #8 · answered by morgorond 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Honestly, I can't think of anything WRONG with it.
The Name is still honoring the Lord.
There is nothing wrong with a naked portrayal.
Chocolate is more tasty than wafers --- but ah, don't think it's been "Transubstantiation" by a Priest.
However, I suspect there is a reason this should miff me ... but it just doesn't ... I think it's cute.
2007-03-30 15:29:56 · answer #9 · answered by Giggly Giraffe 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I learned not to be offended by what the world does with Jesus, his love stretched out on the cross for them who insulted him. I just feel sorry for those who have. They will have to answer to the Father.
Vengeance belongs to the Lord...
2007-03-30 15:25:03 · answer #10 · answered by Commander 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋