I think it's a kinda cool idea. But then I'm a blasphemying heretic who will burn in hell. What's rather interesting to me is that no one objects because Jesus is constructed out of a food item here. (That, of course, really wouldn't make much sense. Jesus is represented as bread or saltine crackers sans salt every Sunday across the gold.) The opposition is to Jesus being portrayed as naked during the crucifixion. Since, you know, Roman didn't strip people down before crucifying them, and we don't have accounts in the canonical gospels of soldiers dividing up J.C.'s clothing. I really don't see that as disrespectful.
And here's J.C. in chocolate. I stole the image from this news article.
Edit: I think it's supposed to be a comment on the commercialization of Easter. Chocolate bunny meets risen savior? If this is the case, it points out a phenomenom that I would think would be more offensive that a sculpture of Jesus in chocolate.
Also, the occupants of the friendly local Russian table point out that Eucharist/communion practices differ in several important ways, particularly that bread doesn't take the form of J.C. and not all Christians believe that the bread becomes the literal flesh of Christ. Legitimate points for pondering pleasure.
No comments:
Post a Comment