Painting Depicts Obama as Crucified Christ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

The Crucified Christ imagery, and quite often the Christ story (Being There, The Iron Giant, The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe, etc ...) has been used quite often in art, literature, movies, photography, and all that.

Offense is your choice.

I am sort of with Odie on this one. It is overt, heavy handed, and sloppy. All it gets from me is a "meh."

---

Allegory is one thing. Even The Green Mile was an allegory of Christ. But straight blasphemy is quite another. But as was said, the reason why idiots get away with this is because Christians won't riot and kill ambassadors over this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00

3) I just asked a question, trying to understand why people are seriously offended. Your "translation" is entirely your own projections and hangups.

---

You supported Obama during the election hence my opinion as to why you don't see a problem with this.

I heard that DU is considering a "Church of Obama" Forum...

Really!!! I'm series!!!! :friendly_wink:

What makes me angrier than the picture is that there are "Christians" who refuse to see it as blasphemy. I literally just got out of an argument with some lefty who was totally okay with it and told me I'm being arrogant, because art and religion are "different". Seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00

open question for people who have a problem with the painting:

If this exact same painting was done by a conservative artist, who meant it ironically, or as an indictment of Obama... (Obama is giving himself "god-like" powers in government / Obama is playing the victim & the artist is referring to the expression "on the cross" / Obama sees himself as a saviour, or others see him as a saviour / etc)... would you still have a problem with it?

aka, is it the image or the intent?

---

It's both... If it was ironic, there would be some clearer indication that "this is what Obama believes"/"this is what the left believes". Instead it's a disturbingly sincere effort at elevating him to Christ's position.

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man >>>

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 1

-----------------------------

I say - let them worship this vile creature. Or mock the crucifixion. Its only natural (liberal). And they shall receive the just recompense of their reward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00

open question for people who have a problem with the painting:

If this exact same painting was done by a conservative artist, who meant it ironically, or as an indictment of Obama... (Obama is giving himself "god-like" powers in government / Obama is playing the victim & the artist is referring to the expression "on the cross" / Obama sees himself as a saviour, or others see him as a saviour / etc)... would you still have a problem with it?

aka, is it the image or the intent?

---

It's both. The image, at face value, is making the statement that Obama is Christ. In that regard, it's a form of idolatry that is guaranteed to offend believing Christians. If it was meant to be ironic, it fails, because it's too similar to the stuff that's done with a straight face by other Obama worshipers. It may be suffering from the difficulty of parodying something that's over the top to begin with, but if you have to explain it, it fails. And, it's a crappy painting, to boot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JB

Another from the guy:

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...01561292_n.jpg

I guess all that "I got Osama" talk really resonated with some people.

---

Okay, now that's irony. Obama wouldn't even wear a flag pin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odysseus

Okay, now that's irony. Obama wouldn't even wear a flag pin.

---

I agree that it is ironic but mostly because the flag was the one in use from July 4, 1912, to July 3, 1959; the one we had as a nation prior to Alaska and Hawaii becoming states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

I agree that it is ironic but mostly because the flag was the one in use from July 4, 1912, to July 3, 1959; the one we had as a nation prior to Alaska and Hawaii becoming states.

---

True, and according to Obama we have 9 more states since then.

I guess this means it's okay to place a picture of Zero in a jar of urine. "Art" and all that ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janice

I guess this means it's okay to place a picture of Zero in a jar of urine. "Art" and all that ...

---

You are too late. Glen Beck beat you to it.


Although it is not a picture, it is a bobble head doll and for my part, that doesn't look like urine.