Storm in US over Chocolate Jesus - Update: Exhibit Cancelled

Originally posted by subz
There's a commandment that says "Thou shalt not create chocolate images?"

No there isn't, but the fourth commandmant states: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." Exodus 20:4

Originally posted by subz
Personally I find it a travesty that this Christian pressure group can muster the energy to be outraged over a chocolate Jesus when it should be protesting the anti-Christian aspects of the US government, most notably the invasion of Iraq.

On what information do you base the above statement. Is it because you believe yourself an authority on Christianity? I hope not because you're clearly demonstrating absolute ignorance.

Quite amusingly your precepts and concept of Christian behavior only emphasizes how very little you know. Whilst Jesus was walking this earth concepts of religious priority in regard to government was discussed with Jesus and documented. His answer back then applies to you the same way now.

He said to them, "Then give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Luke 20:25

It's a very clear statement of government seperation and accountability.

Pokey Oats

Y'see, now that's the kind of debate I was looking for.
Yes, I do understand what you are saying.
Yes, perhaps I came off a bit strong.
Yes, your points are well made.

However, I still disagree about what was previously stated and I still stand by my remarks.

Your point is well taken though.

Still, don't try to insult me with big words then proclaim to take the moral high road.

Y'know, I'm going to admit that I was a total jerk.
I have no problem admitting that I'm wrong about something.
My approach may have been wrong, that I will concede.
It was not very gentlemanly of me to act in such a fashion.
I still believe, however, that this whole thing (the story, not the thread) was blown way out of proportion.
Art is art, and it is open to interpretation.
If you don't like it, don't look at it or participate in it.
Complain about it all you want, but it's not fair to try to say that the artist is wrong for trying to express themselves creatively.
So, that's my formal apology about my approach, but I still stand by my point of view, that I will never apologize for.

[edit on 4/3/2007 by wu kung]

Originally posted by wu kung
Y'see, now that's the kind of debate I was looking for.

And yet I wasn't debating the worth or "artistic" value of a chocolate Jesus. I just grew tired of your perceived intellectual superiority whilst doing nothing more than attacking and berating a user with an opposing view and exposed it for what it was.

Originally posted by wu kung
However, I still disagree about what was previously stated and I still stand by my remarks.

Honestly, and with no offense meant, I truly don't care what your opinion is of a chocolate Jesus and it's artisitc/secular worth.

It was your dogged refusal to even acknowledge another's point of view and arrogant dismissal of their concept of what is sacred that prompted me to respond.

Originally posted by wu kung
Still, don't try to insult me with big words then proclaim to take the moral high road.

I can assure you I wasn't trying to insult you at all and I would suggest that you click the highlighted words in my posts to avoid confusion or misunderstanding.

It is unfortunate you found my vocabulary confronting but I can assure you that my use of "big words" was not to thinly veil personal insults. That would be your narcissism confusing the issue once again.

I did however make criticisms regarding your behavior and insensitivity towards others and used words that appropriately conveyed your conceit.

Whether you wish to call these criticisms constructive or insulting will be concluded based on personal beliefs and evaluations about yourself along with either an honest or dishonest assessment of your character that's proportionate to your desire for personal growth.

Your inability to objectively evaluate the criticisms I made against you and perceive them as insults is all due to faith, beliefs and internal perceptions (about yourself).

Ironically it is faith, belief and personal perception that prompted Frontkjemper to have the courage to respond with an opposing view.

Pokey Oats

Yep, I guess you've got me all figured out.
My goodness, I should be ashamed for having an opinion.

You call me narcissistic and go on attacking my ego, and I have to say, you really aren't bothering me.
You're all sound and fury and elegance but you're no better than I on this subject.
Regardless of your words, you are doing exactly what you proclaim me to be doing.

Originally posted by wu kung
Y'know, I'm going to admit that I was a total jerk.

I don't agree with that statement and think you're being too hard on yourself. Insensitivity towards Spiritual beliefs and worshipping practices is commonly despised in secular society and you were just following the status quo.

Originally posted by wu kung
I have no problem admitting that I'm wrong about something.

Then you will truly achieve much more in life than those who can't concede that their wrong.

Originally posted by wu kung
It was not very gentlemanly of me to act in such a fashion.

And yet it is delightfully gentlemanly and noble to admit such a thing.

Originally posted by wu kung
I still believe, however, that this whole thing (the story, not the thread) was blown way out of proportion.

And you are correct, from a secular point of view. But when the subject matter is revered by a large segment of the population then it becomes an issue of sensitivity and empathy in regard to their offense.

Originally posted by wu kung
Art is art, and it is open to interpretation.
If you don't like it, don't look at it or participate in it.
Complain about it all you want, but it's not fair to try to say that the artist is wrong for trying to express themselves creatively.

No one in this thread (that I'm aware of) said the artist is wrong, they simple stated that his art was offensive to people with a certain faith/belief.

Perhaps it would be easier to conceptualize if it wasn't a chocolate Jesus but rather your wife, father, important family member, or someone that you really admired/respected who was rendered in chocolate and made the subject of sarcasm and mockery.

Originally posted by wu kung
So, that's my formal apology about my approach, but I still stand by my point of view, that I will never apologize for.

Nor should you ever apologize for your point of view/opinion.

But if you value people, can accept them for who they are and appreciate civil discussion then the same courtesy and understanding should be extended towards others that stand by their point of view.

Given your reply I think it is easy to establish that you are a decent, caring person who is interested in personal growth and and will achieve much in life.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my points and I truly sincerely hope that appreciating and accepting people for who they are, even if their beliefs/faith differs to yours, will bring you many rewarding debates, conversations and friendships.

Pokey Oats

Originally posted by Pokey Oats

No there isn't, but the fourth commandmant states: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

Uh so that means all of these necklaces with Jesus on it, and statues and such (by following you interpretation) are sinful?. I think the commandment refers to making a statue or something and worshipping it as if it were Jesus itself. I think the artists should make whatever he wants. I think its a bit odd and i dont really know the his reasoning behind it but, its his perrogative. (spelling)

Originally posted by wu kung
Yep, I guess you've got me all figured out.

Well, only the parts of yourself that you displayed in this thread.

Originally posted by wu kung
My goodness, I should be ashamed for having an opinion.

Gosh no, your opinion is just as important as Frontkjemper's but you weren't seeing his/her comments as another opinion but as something "tangible" that could be debated.

But faith, belief, morality and what is offensive, at least in the context of this thread, is abstract the same way that beauty is an abstract noun; it is based entirely on the interpretation of the perceiver.

Originally posted by wu kung
You call me narcissistic and go on attacking my ego, and I have to say, you really aren't bothering me.

Fair enough, but my response was proportionate to your treatment of Frontkjemper.

Originally posted by wu kung
You're all sound and fury and elegance but you're no better than I on this subject.

Honestly, I'm flattered that you found what I had to say elegant, thank you.

However, I am indiffernet towards the chocolate sculpture and was only being highly critical of your dismissal of Frontkjemper's opinions and faith.

Originally posted by wu kung
Regardless of your words, you are doing exactly what you proclaim me to be doing.

Not quite. I was criticising your behavior (perhaps too critically) and attempting to offer reason and insight into another's perspective based on concepts of reverence that you displayed no empathy/compassion towards.

I will concede that my second post may have been a little vitriolic and for that I apologize.

I think you received my points graciously and maturely. I could ask, nor hope for anything more.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to consider and process what I had to say. You have my respect and appreciation.

Pokey Oats

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
Uh so that means all of these necklaces with Jesus on it, and statues and such (by following you interpretation) are sinful?.

My interpretation is completely and utterly irrelevant. I have neither defined sin, being sinfull or even sinfullness!!

All I did was refute someone who thought they were being clever when they said:
subz: There's a commandment that says "Thou shalt not create chocolate images?"

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
I think the commandment refers to making a statue or something and worshipping it as if it were Jesus itself.

And I think you're absolutely right in your understanding of the commandment. I wasn't pasting Commandment 4 as a reason why the chocolate sculpture is unholy, sinful or blasphemous. I was just offering subz the same contempt he offered others.

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
I think the artists should make whatever he wants. I think its a bit odd and i dont really know the his reasoning behind it but, its his perrogative. (spelling)

I absolutely agree with you and embrace all aspects of freedom and a free society.

But I also have compassion and empathy for those that have Spiritual beliefs and think that, quite tragically, many bitter and angry artists will use our precious freedom to insult, harm and offend others that have a different opinion, morality and take on life.

Pokey Oats

And to you Pokey Oats, I feel the same.
People like you, who make me stop and question myself, have my utmost respect.

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
My interpretation is completely and utterly irrelevant. I have neither defined sin, being sinfull or even sinfullness!!

Pokey Oats

I apologize. I thought you replied with that commandment as a way of saying that what the artist was doing was sinful. I misinterpreted you, i understand what you were saying now

i was thinking about this for a while now and how is it ok for a church or religious museum have a statue of jesus made of porcelain and then complain about one made of chocolate imean even the statement is blatantly more obvious then in most art the commercialization of christian holidays like easter and all of that aside why should it get pulled in america in a free society.....now to get back to my spaghetti "temptation of christ"

First, let me state for the record that all of this discussion about whether it was implied that Christ was black because it was made of chocolate is kind of ridiculous to me. Anyone knows that Christ was neither black or white. He was Hebrew.

Secondly, why does the color of Christ seem to be of such significance to so many people? The only thing that is important in regards to Christ is his teachings. If you don't at least try to follow what he taught, then it is all for naught and you certainly cannot claim to be Christian.

Heh, sorry, that last line was just funny.
Does it have Mary Magdelane Meatballs?
(no disrespect intended, I'm just being a smartass)

no parmesean cheese was cheaper

Thanks wu kung. I see you've got the same dude for your signature

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
No there isn't, but the fourth commandmant states: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." Exodus 20:4

What's your point? You've acknowledged that there is no doctrinal reasons why this statute should be taken as offensive. Your reference to the fourth commandment, aside from trying to be contemptuous, proves just how HYPOCRITICAL the Christian faithful can be. Why is there no threats from the Catholic League over the graven images in the Uffizi, Louvre, or Royal Gallery? Don't they break the fourth commandment too?

The reason I brought the topic of doctrine up is because of the members who were trying to equate this with the Muslims furore over the depiction of Mohammed. If the Christians had respected their own commandments from time immemorial and found any idols of Jesus Christ to be an afront to their faith then I could equate this outcry with the one about the Mohammed cartoons. But since the Christian faith, at large, have chosen when to obey this commandment and when not to I find their piety here to be quite lacking.

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
On what information do you base the above statement. Is it because you believe yourself an authority on Christianity? I hope not because you're clearly demonstrating absolute ignorance.

Don't try to troll bait me please. It's not going to work. I made a personal statement of what I believed. I welcome disagreement but I don't care much if you don't agree with it.

Originally posted by Pokey Oats
Quite amusingly your precepts and concept of Christian behavior only emphasizes how very little you know. Whilst Jesus was walking this earth concepts of religious priority in regard to government was discussed with Jesus and documented. His answer back then applies to you the same way now.

He said to them, "Then give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Luke 20:25

It's a very clear statement of government seperation and accountability.

Wouldn't your reasoning completely negate commandments like "thou shalt not kill" or "love thy neighbour"? Or do they come with the caveat of "unless it's by your government then leave them to it".

Since you've completely overlooked the fact that the government of the United States is meant to be a representative democracy, and not an Emperor like Caesar, it should be the duty of the Christians to see THEIR representative acts according to their wishes.

Can I also suggest you take some of the advice you gave to wu kung and show some respect here. I never passed judgement on any one here. I didn't even pass judgement on the Christian League. If you feel you cannot talk to us members with decorum I suggest you refrain from posting.

[edit on 3/4/07 by subz]

Thanks wu kung. I see you've got the same dude for your signature

Actually, it's not a dude, it's a young girl.
She's a character from the band Gorillaz.
Her name is Noodle, she is their guitarist.
She's Japanese and highly adorable.
But, you're welcome.

Sorry, I know, I know, totally off topic.

Continue please.

I just watched an interview with the sculptor of this object d'art, and, although he seemed kind of monotone, he spoke of this project as a labor of love.
There didn't seem to be any sarcasm or malice in his character or demeanor what so ever.

He said that it took something like 3 or 4 months to complete.
That's dedication.

I admire that.

Noodlez is a girl? Well I'll be...

I'm pretty sure Damien Albarn does her voice too.

Now back to your regular programming...

Originally posted by subz
Noodlez is a girl?

Well I'll be...

I'm pretty sure Damien Albarn does her voice too.

Now back to your regular programming...

Miho Hatori and Tina Weymouth do the voice. ALong with like 5 other people.

Wow! Is there any one else who wants to show how little I know about Gorillaz today?