Is this offensive?

[ZiSunka]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/29/entertainment/main2627264.shtml?source=mostpop_story

Without telling you my take on this, I would like to know what you really think of a chocolate Christ. Is it offensive to you as a Christian?

I'll tell you my opinion later.

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2007/03/29/image2627261g.jpg

[CelticRose]

I get a little tired of these sorts of things. I find it more boring than anything else; as if the God who made the heavens & the earth could be reduced to a few pounds of chocolate. It's rather silly. Why give it importance & credability by even paying attention to it? The world will always act in a worldly way.

[MrJim]

It would be offensive in that I wouldn't want my children to see it and that it's a waste of chocolate, which should not be used for such childish things ;)

Read the article, the guy is a nut job...though I don't know how much we're needed to raise cain about this sort of thing...it should just be melted down, maybe mix in some peanut butter...

[FAITHFILLED]

I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY. I AM WITHOUT THOUGHT AFTER READING THE ARTICLE.
HAVE A BLESSED DAY.

[oliveplants]

disgusting, but typical.

Pagans can worship their ishtar with chocolate bunnies, but God does not delight in such things for Himself.

[ZiSunka]

I have the urge to hang a sign on it that says, "Taste and see! The Lord is good!"

If it's good chocolate, of course.

But it makes me think about what a friend of mine always says, "Food is love, that's why Christ presented himself as food." Meaning the symbolism of the last supper, of course.

I think it's an interesting portrayal of Christ. Something to start conversations with pagans over.

[Latreia]

If it were a clothed figure of the Christ as Christians think of Him, it would be amazing. Not even Catholics would mind, I think.

The "artiste" Cosimo Cavallaro, obviously hoped for all the adverse publicity and so made it as offensive as he could.

But then I read about his other "works" and the part that food played:

-repainted a Manhattan hotel room in melted mozzarella cheese

-sprayed five tons of pepper jack cheese on a house in Wyoming

-festooned a a four poster bed with 312 pounds of processed ham.

After all, in this latest "effort" he might have used a combination of bleu cheese and limbuger.

Same old, same old.......yawn....:sleep:

[ZiSunka]

The Romans didn't let people wear clothing while they were being crucified. Jesus was most certainly hanging on the cross naked. It was meant to be humiliating.

It's we westerners that make him wear a loin cloth in our churches so we don't have to experience the embarassment and humiliation of his nudity.

[Latreia]

The Romans didn't let people wear clothing while they were being crucified. Jesus was most certainly hanging on the cross naked. It was meant to be humiliating.

It's we westerners that make him wear a loin cloth in our churches so we don't have to experience the embarassment and humiliation of his nudity.

Excellent point. Very glad that you made it.

Blasphemies crucify our Savior many times over through the insults aimed at our souls.



http://www3.christianforums.com/images/icons/icon2.gif Forgive them, though they know what they do.

[Joykins]

I don't think it is half as bad as those toy guns that shoot cross-shaped sponges. Now THAT is offensive.

[CelticRose]

Huh? I haven't seen those.

[Joykins]

I saw 'em in a catalogue for Easter toys a few years ago.

Cross-shaped sponge bullets...Cross-shaped missiles to be shot with rubber bands--astounding bad taste, so bad it was funny really.

[Latreia]

I don't think it is half as bad as those toy guns that shoot cross-shaped sponges. Now THAT is offensive.

I saw 'em in a catalogue for Easter toys a few years ago.

Cross-shaped sponge bullets...Cross-shaped missiles to be shot with rubber bands--astounding bad taste, so bad it was funny really.

Actually saying that an ugly, offensive representation of Jesus Christ can't match the offensiveness of sponge bullets, regardless of their shape?

A bewildering distraction from the image in the OP which is in prominent display for hundreds to see, as well as thousands in the media coverage???

:scratch:

[ZiSunka]

I find those toy guns supremely offensive, too.

Committing violence, even pretend violence, using a symbol of our Lord, making the weapons with forced labor from political prisoners, some of them our siblings in the Lord, and acting like good Christians own guns, that's more offensive than a chocolate statue.

[Latreia]

I find those toy guns supremely offensive, too.

Committing violence, even pretend violence, using a symbol of our Lord, making the weapons with forced labor from political prisoners, some of them our siblings in the Lord, and acting like good Christians own guns, that's more offensive than a chocolate statue.

Perhaps you did not see the full photo of this object.
It serves no other purpose than charlatan efforts to attract attention by insulting Christians in a revolting manner.

Sponge bullets don't begin to be any more offensive.

We do not worship and consider sacred any shape of sponge.

[ZiSunka]

It's an anabaptist thing Latreia.

The image this man has created is only symbolic of Christ because it's creator says that is who it represents. I'm sure it bears little resemblence to the reality of Christ's likeness. It is, afterall, just a big lump of chocolate shaped like a man. That's all.

But bullets, real or toy, fired in the name of God, that is a horrible abomination against the Lord who told us to love our enemies, to do good for those who hate us, to give up our lives for those who would kill us. To shoot someone in his name is to defy his teachings.

A vain idol is nothing. Killing in Christ's name is a terrible sin. vbmenu_register("postmenu_33467744", true);

[Crazy Liz]

I didn't read the article, but I agree with those who say there are offensive ways to interpret this artwork and other interpretations that make one think. That is one of the strengths of art, poetry and great literature. Once one realizes the depth of possible interpretations, it can become a means of instruction or food for meditation.

Whereas it is difficult to find any redeeming value in crass toys.

But perhaps the toys are more shocking to Anabaptists and Quakers because of our historical peace witness. While the chocolate sculpture evokes the imagery of the Lord's Supper in a strange, skewed modern way, can you see that toys that shoot cross-shaped bullets would offend Christians who have learned and try to teach others the meaning of turning the other cheek?

The cross is offensive, shameful and violent, but Christ transformed it into something for the good of the world. Something we are invited to partake in. Yet there is an ambiguity in our participation. By taking this idea and portraying it in a less stylized form, we are provoked to think anew what meaning and what gifts Christ meant to impart to us through the Lord's supper and his crucifixion.

[Latreia]

Liz, the photo of the full "work of art" cannot be posted on CF as it would be a rule violation.

But if you think it is OK, I can send you a link to the entire view and you can post it.

To bring in the violence implied in sponge bullets as a way to distract from the offence and ugliness of this thing in chocolate is lame, I think.

Here is the "artiste's" website:

http://www.cosimocavallaro.com/

[Crazy Liz]

I've seen the full image before I saw the cropped version here.

You may be right about the comparison being a distraction. A crass toy and a work of art are not really comparable.

I agree that there is ugliness in this image, as there is in every crucifix.

isaiah 53:2-5

[Latreia]

I've seen the full image before I saw the cropped version here.

You may be right about the comparison being a distraction. A crass toy and a work of art are not really comparable.

I agree that there is ugliness in this image, as there is in every crucifix.

isaiah 53:2-5


You are saying this is ugly, then:

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/ceremonial-processional-cross.gif



Perhaps we need to alert Raven?


While we are at it, get these out of the Religious Special Items:

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/ProCross.gif http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/monstrance-926.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/Soldier%20Cross7.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/crucifix_necklace.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/Crucifix7.gif

[CelticRose]

I have problems with these, not because I think they are ugly, but I do think they obscure the truth of the cross & we do need to remember Christ was crucified on a Roman cross between two thieves, not on an altar between two candles. Sorry, I can't remember where the quote is from. Crucifixtion is about the cruelest, ugliest death imaginable.

[Crazy Liz]

There is ugliness in every crucifix. As CR pointed out, the degree to which crosses are beautified is the degree to which the artist has removed it from its original significance and given it a new significance.

I wear a beautiful cross around my neck, which has a significance for me that turns this trend upside-down, as it was worn by a dying man, who was my friend. Others see beauty, but it represents death. In a way, it is the opposite of what we do when we flower the cross on Easter Sunday.

That paradox between beauty and ugliness is a large part of the meaning of the cross for Christians.

[Latreia]

There is ugliness in every crucifix. As CR pointed out, the degree to which crosses are beautified is the degree to which the artist has removed it from its original significance and given it a new significance.

I wear a beautiful cross around my neck, which has a significance for me that turns this trend upside-down, as it was worn by a dying man, who was my friend. Others see beauty, but it represents death. In a way, it is the opposite of what we do when we flower the cross on Easter Sunday.

That paradox between beauty and ugliness is a large part of the meaning of the cross for Christians.


How sad that it is so alien to you, because there is no paradox. There is the miracle that Love came out of the worst that man could do to man.

That out of the blackness of death came New Life.

They call it the Resurrection.

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[CelticRose]

That does not make what happened to Christ on the cross any less ugly or horrible. It merely points out the grace that has so freely & undeservedly been granted unto us. To deny the ugliness is to deny what it cost Jesus to die for us. Yes, He is resurrected, but He had to go through the cross & nothing in scripture or out of it tells me this was an easy or pleasant experience. Quite the opposite in fact.

[Crazy Liz]

How sad that it is so alien to you, because there is no paradox. There is the miracle that Love came out of the worst that man could do to man.

That out of the blackness of death came New Life.

They call it the Resurrection.

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Yes, and that is a paradox, isn't it? The mystery of the gospel?

[Latreia]

I have problems with these, not because I think they are ugly, but I do think they obscure the truth of the cross & we do need to remember Christ was crucified on a Roman cross between two thieves, not on an altar between two candles. Sorry, I can't remember where the quote is from. Crucifixtion is about the cruelest, ugliest death imaginable.

What I can't understand about you is that you seem to want to stay fixed on the agony of the cross, to keep reliving it over and over.

The Messiah did not stay on the cross, is not crucified forever. That is what the gospels are about, that Jesus is resurrected, then and forever.

Our Lord Jesus is living, now, within us. He died for us, suffered for us, but that is not the final word.

Why not let Him be resurrected and free us of sin?
Must He stay on that cross just for you?

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ZiSunka]

You are saying this is ugly, then:

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/ceremonial-processional-cross.gif



Perhaps we need to alert Raven?


While we are at it, get these out of the Religious Special Items:

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/ProCross.gif http://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/monstrance-926.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/items/Soldier%20Cross7.gif







Those are very lovely trinkets. But they are not representative of the nature of crucifixion. Christ did not die in a beautiful, peaceful way. There was blood and stench and suffering and unbearable pain. None of the crosses you posted show any of that, because it is offensive to people to see that kind of suffering.

The only thing I would change about the chocolate sculpture is, I would make the face broken to represent the beatings and the suffering he took for us. He had been torn apart by the scourging. He would have been filthy from falling bloodied onto the dirty street. He would have been covered in welts and sweat.

Over the centuries, artists have cleaned Christ up and given him a countenance of slumbering, but he really died in agony.

This is more like he would have looked on the cross:

http://www.painterilya.com/artworks/crucifixion1.jpg



But even that image has cleaned away the blood, sweat dirt and tears. All those hideous renderings of the crucifixion in old gothic cathedrals are more accurate than anything we hang in our churches today.

[Latreia]

Those are very lovely trinkets. But they are not representative of the nature of crucifixion. Christ did not die in a beautiful, peaceful way. There was blood and stench and suffering and unbearable pain. None of the crosses you posted show any of that, because it is offensive to people to see that kind of suffering.

The only thing I would change about the chocolate sculpture is, I would make the face broken to represent the beatings and the suffering he took for us. He had been torn apart by the scourging. He would have been filthy from falling bloodied onto the dirty street. He would have been covered in welts and sweat.

Over the centuries, artists have cleaned Christ up and given him a countenance of slumbering, but he really died in agony.

This is more like he would have looked on the cross:

http://www.painterilya.com/artworks/crucifixion1.jpg



But even that image has cleaned away the blood, sweat dirt and tears. All those hideous renderings of the crucifixion in old gothic cathedrals are more accurate than anything we hang in our churches today.


It is because Christians remember what Christ suffered on the cross that makes them rejoice in His Resurrection.

Every Christian reaches for knowledge of Jesus in every portion of His life, knowing Him in all of it..

That is why it is doubly tragic to keep Him fastened to the Cross as though He never triumphed over it all.

He IS the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords, He is the Messiah and the Saviour of the World. Not because He stayed on that cross, but because He defeated the message that the Roman Empire lined the roads with, the crucifixions of thousand of human beings, of Jews, and gentiles as well. That they died and rotted there and were unknown, though not unmourned.

"Where we had thought to travel outward, / we shall come to the center of our own existance..../ Where we had thought to find an abomination, / we shall find a God..... / Where we had thought to conquer another, / we shall conquer ourselves..... / Where we had thought to be alone, / we shall be with all the world. "
~ Joseph Campbell

[ZiSunka]

I used to agree with you that portraying Christ on the cross denied his resurrection and triumph over sin and death.

Now I've started to think that Evangelicals miss out on a deeper understanding of Him because they never look at the suffering, the death and the gore. No, He's no longer on the cross, but that doesn't mean we should never think of the time when he was on the cross. Those six hours were the pivotal event of this universe.

[Latreia]

I used to agree with you that portraying Christ on the cross denied his resurrection and triumph over sin and death.

Now I've started to think that Evangelicals miss out on a deeper understanding of Him because they never look at the suffering, the death and the gore. No, He's no longer on the cross, but that doesn't mean we should never think of the time when he was on the cross. Those six hours were the pivotal event of this universe.

Then I give you this, to be with Him:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hxmlUWceHg

[Joykins]

Jesus should be portrayed both ways--the agony of Good Friday, the joy of Easter Sunday. The whole story, not one half or the other.

[ZiSunka]

Agreed. :)

[ZiSunka]

Then I give you this, to be with Him:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hxmlUWceHg

Yep, that's a lot closer to the truth. Only it went on and on for hours.

[Crazy Liz]

Jesus should be portrayed both ways--the agony of Good Friday, the joy of Easter Sunday. The whole story, not one half or the other.

Agreed. :)

Me three!

[CelticRose]

No arguements here.

[ZiSunka]

Me three!

Cool! :cool:

A peaceable agreement at last! :)