The news coverage was never very clear about this: Was the objection to the sculpture of Jesus made of chocolate because it was made of chocolate or because the artist rendered him naked?
2007-04-05 07:18:40 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
As a Christian, I was never offended by the chocolate Jesus. Yeah, I heard a priest on the news saying that I should be, but I wasn't.
I think that a big part of why offense was taken is that people today enjoy being offended. Makes them feel important, like they are standing up against all the world to show that they are right. Or something.
Jesus made out of chocolate. I still wonder why, but when I looked at a picture of it, it was pretty impressive as far as art goes, regardless of the medium.
And the nudity part? Well, I was not offended by that, though I assume many believers would be. Throughout history various figures in the Bible and elsewhere have been depicted as nude. Nudity can be done tastefully as art (no pun intended), or not so tastefully.
My guess is that people were offended because they assumed the artist was showing the piece 1) during the Lenten season, 2) the piece was nude, 3) the easter bunny is made of chocolate, not Jesus, thus making Jesus seem to be a myth as the easter bunny is, and 4) people simply liked to be offended.
Just my thoughts, anyway.
2007-04-05 07:32:44 · answer #1 · answered by Still Learning 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never really heard what the details were. That's the way the news has been for years .... no accurate details. However .......
I'd want to know why the "artist" decided to create the statue? Was it to glorify Jesus? Was it to make a statement about this or that issue? Was it to mock Jesus/God? What was the reason?
Personally, I feel there is more to this statue thing than just being an "artist's" work and also being of chocolate. I think the "artist" did it to raise some hackles and get a rise out of people. The "artist" probably wanted to make people mad. If so, that's a wrong reason for doing it with that figure as the subject of the "art."
The use of the terms "art" and "artist" is in question as well. The perhaps do not accurately describe this work and this person.
Kev
2007-04-05 08:04:05 · answer #2 · answered by Hobgoblin Kev 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably neither and both. I always wonder, what would be the reaction of he had made a chocolate Muhammad. I will believe they really believe in art when they are willing to do that one ... but they won't ... why? because it will offend people. So what's the issue with being offended by a chocolate Jesus?
Perhaps it was the licking Jesus part that offended people, or just making Jesus art, rather than an object of love, adoration and belief.
2007-04-05 07:23:53 · answer #3 · answered by John B 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus was an ordinary man of ordinary birth, he looked like a middle eastern so chocolate isn't a bad idea, and yes, he is often portrayed naked on the cross, it was a good way to flout that stupid idea of rabbits being the chocolate thing to think thats what Easter is all about. It was a great idea to make a Chocolate Jesus.
2007-04-05 07:27:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes actually it does. He is someones religious symbol. It shows a lack of respect for that religion. What also offends me is the story about the life size witch hanging by a noose in a guys yard considered a halloween decoration. But then Im a witch, that is my religions symbol. Now I would be offended by a Jesus hanging by a noose too. Funny I wonder how many christians are going to be offended by the witch in the noose hanging in the guys yard? Blessings, Aviana
2016-05-17 23:32:38 · answer #5 · answered by vonda 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was the nakedness. Never mind that for the first half of their religion they portrayed him as naked all the time.
The sculpture was brilliant- it simultaneously praised Jesus AND called into question the real meaning of Easter to Christians.
2007-04-05 07:23:04 · answer #6 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe that the artist has the right to express himself....i think that it would have been very, very, very insulting to the Christian faith followers, if he made a small Jesus of chocolate to be eaten.
2007-04-05 07:24:06 · answer #7 · answered by MICHAEL O 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chocolate Jesus PBUH was delicious
2007-04-05 07:24:38 · answer #8 · answered by Love Exists? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really sure but it seems to be following an exhausted trajectory of art in NYC that is meant to ruffle Catholic feathers. After 20 or so years, it isn't very interesting any more.
2007-04-05 07:25:02 · answer #9 · answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They thought people would get sexual thoughts when you combine chocolate and naked... besides you know how racist most of the folks who protest this type of thing are...
2007-04-05 07:25:25 · answer #10 · answered by XX 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋