September 28, 2007
-
The Last Supper
As I mentioned in my photoblog yesterday, the Catholic League is upset over this ad by Miller with semi-nude men and women in bondage sitting in “The Last Supper.” Here is the link: Link
People feel that the ad is sacrilegious.
Do you feel the ad is sacrilegious?
Comments (102)
Yes.
Yay for free speech.
People need to lighten up. I’m all for respecting holy things, but honestly what is so sacred about a famous drawing that Da Vinci painted? I mean really, who sits only at one side of the table to eat? You’d think that with a big ass table everyone would sit on both sides comfortably and actually face Jesus? Right? Silly. Grow up people!
Well…it isn’t exactly something I’d hang up on my wall…
no
Meh. No point in getting worked up over it, not going to change anything.
Well, At first I would say yea, it kinda does.. It does kinda mock Jesus at ”The Last Supper”. But good thing I have sense of humor.. So I do not really know wether to take it offend or just chuckle about it..
as i said on your photo xanga early it is an art historical quotation that is no different than other modern art images that reference art from the past. example: an image of the virgin mary made out of various materials including feces, although i forget the artist at this moment. art quotes past art and that is kinda just the way it is.
I don’t think it is so much the picture by DaVinci, but the fact that people tend to think about Jesus and “The Last Supper” and instead of associating it with scripture they associate it with the painting. Too bad, really. I don’t like the ad and I haven’t seen the whole thing. It just seems sad that most people won’t even bother to read about the passover meal in the book of John, Chapter 13; the book of Matthew, Chapter 26; the book of Luke, Chapter 22; or the book of Mark, Chapter 14.
I think it’s a parody of a famous painting. I also think it was intended to provoke Christians to outrage. I refuse to rise to the bait.
I think it’s a cool advertisement. I’m not offended, and none of the Christians I know who’ve seen it are offended either.
It’s hysterical, honestly.
And if you’ve even fucking HEARD of the Folsom Street Fair, you know that it’s about as sinful, unholy, and absolutely mind-warpingly filthy as human beings can get; so it’s probably even funnier because it’s a bunch of perverts using satire.
I like it. People need to grow up and understand humor, satire, mockery, it is all just a part of human fucking nature.
And erm…I’ve read about the Last Supper in the Scriptures. I think a lot of people have.
sac·ri·le·gious
play_w(“S0011900″)
(skr-ljs, -ljs)
adj.1. Grossly irreverent toward what is or is held to be sacred.2. Having committed sacrilege.
i guess so huh?
Do I care? No one here got upset when the bomb in Mohamad’s turban was drawn. You should have respect for all religions, not just your own. Or respect for none, like me. The actual painting of the last supper is just that, a painting. The actual image isn’t a photo from 30 AD.
BTW: The brunette behind dog face is hot!
It’s not miller time?
Damn Catholics.
i’m going to folsom this year and i can’t wait! lovefest here i come!
I wouldn’t even say sacreligious as much as just plain old disrespecting a beautiful piece of art.
I wouldn’t necessarily say sacreligious, though I do think it throws itself in the face of Christians. But it’s just plain offensive. I mean, how tacky can you get, really? Do we have to be children in order to make people want to come see us? If you find this funny, grow up.
The Last Supper is a painting from Leonardo daVinci, therefore it is his rendition of that event. I see this more as a mockery on the painting rather than Christ’s last meal with His disciples. (I am a believer and follower of Christ).
Hell yeah! Three cheers for sacrilege!
adj.1. Grossly irreverent toward what is or is held to be sacred.2. Having committed sacrilege.
It’s sad if people have made a painting to be held as sacred vs the actual event as sacred.
I don’t personally find it offensive, but it has the hallmarks of the comics depicting the prohet Mohammad; if the Catholics find it offensive, it should be withdrawn out of respect for their beliefs, 1st Amendment notwithstanding
They would be disappointed if it was not sacrilegious, so yes it is very much so.
Portraying Jesus Christ [God] as a homosexual, a fornicator, an adulterer, or any other participant in “pornaia” which is where we get the word “porn” from, is simple blasphemy and it’s an abomination. It’s sacrilege and I am offended. I can’t imagine how much more so God is.
Maybe to put it in perspective what if we photoshopped your mother into that photo? Pretty gross huh? And unnecessary? Yeah. What about your daughter? Now it’s not so funny.
I’m surprised how many “Christians” don’t have a problem with it. Don’t you read the Bible? God is to be revered, to be honored! He is so high even just his NAME should be handled carefully and with reverence.
Of course it is, but I expect this type behavior from those type people. God will deal with them in His own way in His own time.
^^ I think God is more offended at Christians claiming to be his followers and not doing the things he asks us to do. Just because you go to church on Sundays and put a little donation in the plate doesn’t qualify you as a Christian. I think he could give a rats ass about this stuff. “Those type” people are at least out in the open about it, while most Christians claim to be followers but are just as your Bible says, “whited sepulchers.”
Ick, yes.
I think he could give a rats ass about this stuff
Revelation 21:7-9
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Either you’re right, mister, or the Bible is right.
Man, those whoremongers get a bad name in EVERYTHING.
^^Oh yeah, you sure showed me! I was mistaken. I see the error of my ways! Thank you for pointing out that scripture. Now I’m enlightened and have repented. You’re right. Sorry. I changed my mind. God really does give a shit about some photograph featuring sinners! Bless you brother. I’ll see you in heaven!
Yes, but that is the point so I refuse to let it bother me.
Not just a photograph featuring sinners, a photograph featuring Jesus [who was punched, spat upon, had his back ripped to shreds, had his beard ripped out, and ultimately died of suffocation as the result of crucifixion all for the salvation of mankind] AS a sinner. Blasphemy. I provided that scripture not to show how “holy” I am, but because you probably haven’t read much of the Bible. If you had, we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now.
A good tree bears good fruit, right?
No, and who cares, free speech.
to my degree, no i could care less. To others, i’m sure it is.
Yes, but it’s hardly original or shocking.
Absolutely, and it’s also funny as hell.
How can anyone honestly believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful God gives a shit what we say, think, or paint about God!
Seriously, this smacks of the days when gods were thought to have love affairs, squabbles, and grudges–the same days which Christians denounce as pagan.
If you’re offended, fine–but don’t reduce God to that level.
When an organisation has made a mockery of itself, expect to be mocked.
RYC: I wasn’t too happy on my journey, and all this mish-mash of conflicting religions taught me that there was something there, yet revolted me with its wordy tangle. Someone gave me the essece without the garbage of “this master, but not that one,” and “this belief system, but not that one.”
So occasionally I pass it on in a blog or other ways.
Btw, the Catholic League should point out that Miller tastes like piss, which it does. Lol.
I could never get past all the fornication, adultery, murder, talking donkeys, miracles, false gods, fire from heaven. I stopped just short of the new testament. But now, my life is complete. You showed me that scripture…and I’ve seen the light. Ihave seen the light! Let’s not fight anymore brother, you’ve obviously showed me up with your vast knowledge of the Bible. We are now one. You’ve saved my soul and will embrace you in heaven. You’re my own personal Jesus. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
But no, personally I wouldn’t have designed it, but neither would I get or hot and bothered seeing it.
Every time I see “sacriligious,” I think “who cares?”
Guess what! You are allowed to offend people!
of course it is, but it is still funny
Seriously, I don’t find it a problem because it doesn’t persuade me in any way.
Wasn’t Jesus pissed(and I mean mad) when the Pharisees mocked the church? But they succeeded by having believers follow them.
If a Christian isn’t being anyway persuaded to follow what this ad is trying to convey, I don’t think they should be all riled up about it. You’re going to have blasphemous ads, sayings, and signs forever. Get used to it.
ehh yea it is but I don’t mind too much
Apparently Xcholo4u just finished reading the Gospel According to Shrek…
I was diggin’ your message This_Is_Importent. Until you went to petty insults.
Not cool man.
I have seen lots of parodies on that famous painting. They mostly make me laugh. But are they “sacrelidgous” or “irreverent toward something considered sacred”? Well . . . yeah. But most famous things (like paintings from that era) do make for good satire . . .
Get used to it.
Sure doesn’t sound like you were diggin’ anything I was sayin! I guess you missed the original attack of false gods, talking donkeys…
You really gotta read both sides of the story, man!
I think you missed my point.
^Meh, could be. It’s late.
It blows my mind.
If God is anywhere near as easy to upset as some of the people here, there’s no hope for anyone.
Of course it is, but I expect this type behavior from those type people. God will deal with them in His own way in His own time.
<li class=”itemtimestamp”>9/28/2007 8:55 PM
<li class=”itemsubmitter”>lead_mare (message)
What she said
This_is_ Important, I think your comments made were in poor taste and I DID read all the comments.
Nope… and I LOVE the ad!
Now that is genius!
It’s free speech morons. Deal with it. If you’re going to get bent out of shape (ignore the pun) over a stupid ad then you’ve got bigger issues at hand. For god sakes, grow up. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it.
Not
just a photograph featuring sinners, a photograph featuring Jesus [who
was punched, spat upon, had his back ripped to shreds, had his beard
ripped out, and ultimately died of suffocation as the result of
crucifixion all for the salvation of mankind] AS a sinner. Blasphemy.
I provided that scripture not to show how “holy” I am, but because you
probably haven’t read much of the Bible. If you had, we wouldn’t be
having this conversation right now.
A good tree bears good fruit, right?
~This_Is_Important
I didn’t see Jesus in this photograph. I didn’t see anybody because of that stupid watermark deal over it. I am, however, looking at the same photo without the marking on it, and I can assure you that there is no Jesus to be found.
I would think Jesus would be happy. It’s about people getting along really well with one another and sharing. Jesus wanted us to get along. This is how some people choose to do it, and that’s fine with me.
Damn those italics.
I like how Mystic_Xingjing thinks.
This_is_ Important, I think your comments made were in poor taste and I DID read all the comments.
I’m refering to insults
yes it’s a painting but it represents something that is directly tied to a religion and symbolic of that religion so it is a sacrelgious ad.
Yes.
its kinda rediclious to say the least
i mean lok at it
the last supper was a very important part in my faith with communion
Chui wouldn’t mind, we all know he digs this sorta thing.
I don’t really think it looks like the “Last Supper” at all. I’m also pretty sure that the true last supper didn’t look a thing like DaVinci’s painting so really it seems like they’re mocking the painting itself more than the concept behind it.
Why should we be shocked that non-Christians act like non-Christians?
Who cares? No one’s forcing people to put this up in their living rooms. Jesus.
Yeah, but is that really so surprising? o_O
bwahahaa. Jesus was a black man!
and.. hoorah for the fetish gear? freedom of expression is freedom of expression. don’t like it? don’t look at it.
YES – but no more than anything I have maybe seen on Southpark or Family Guy
I dont know….should Iseriously get all mad at this or leave it alone and deal with more important issues. Yeah, we have to decide whether this is a direct blashemy against God or using a painting of the Lords Supper to get attention… I think its the latter… but through getitng attention i guess it is blashemious. Ok yeah – i decided this is wrong. But should I waste my time worrying about it – Well, im not – I have better things to do with my time.
ALSO: I bowled a 95 today! Thats 25 better than my first game at 75 and 10 better than my 85 in may. At this rate I will be a champion in like a year or two.. lol
Daniel (doubledb)
It reminds me of some kinda wierd skit I would see of SNL or something MUGATO would do in the movie ZOOLANDER.. lol – just a random thought I had
It’s a parody of a PAINTING. Get over it.
It probably is…even though I can’t see the whole thing at the moment–I get the jist.
PS–I’m kind of involved in that lifestyle…I’m a Christian, and yes, even I find that offensive. People think that just because someone’s involved in BDSM means they’re freaks or worse, and it’s not true. It’s so far from the truth. We’re normal just like everyone else. That poster doesn’t represent all of us, by far.
Let me also add: I’m a straight woman…again, haven’t seen the whole poster…but I went to the website…saw men kissing…yeah…I do kiss guys, but I’m not one. LOL.
wow, that is something else.
Yes, but it should be protected by free speech.
It’s disturbing.
When it comes to homos offending anything Christian…for some reason it always seems to be accepted…even among so called “Christians”.
But you better watch out when homos get offended, they start boycotting, protesting, crying etc.
So much for tolerance…when it comes to homos it’s always a one sided argument!
I wonder what the point is? What did they intend by portraying the last supper?
It seems to be a slap across the face, but Christians are to turn the other cheek.
Never mind, I found the answers at their official site, which says the poster is “the first in a series that draws from well-known paintings, album covers, movie posters, or other iconic images.”
…
“There is no intention to be particularly pro-religion or anti-religion
with this poster; the image is intended only to be reminiscent of the
‘Last Supper’ painting.”
What? They’re just eating at a long table.
Who cares? That’s hilarious.
“Guess what! You are allowed to offend people”
That is so funny that anyone really believes that. No you’re not allowed to offend people, only certain people are alowed to be offended. Put up a poster of Mohammad taking in the rear and see what happens. Or make a poster mocking the Mathew Shepherd murder. Maybe cute little Mathew enjoyed the beating that killed him? Portray that murder as a gay S&M event. We all know fags enjoy such things, right?
Only some people can be mocked in this society.
No. People need to lighten up. South Park has Jesus as one of its characters and people don’t seem to mind that. It’s just a painting. People are too serious about religion, especially Catholics.
Ya, probably. Good thing we don’t live in a theocracy.
…Yet, anyway.
Only some people can be mocked in this society.
<li class=”itemtimestamp”>9/29/2007 9:40 AM
<li class=”itemsubmitter”>trunthepaige (message)
Well that’s because – and I’m saying this from the actual definition made by the big sociology and anthropology kahuna’s, not my own personal opinion — discrimination and predjudice (as sociological terms, not “I discriminate every morning when I pick out which socks to wear” because I know someone is going to start quibbling), especially racism (although I iknow that’s not the issue in this case), can only be against a minority group. I know in some states it’s even in the law that “hate crimes” can only exist against “traditional minorities.”
The majority group in america are the WASPs (White, Anglo Saxon, Protestants. although we need to find a way to put “middle class” and “male” in there too.) So yes, they are going to get a lot of criticism from the minorities. that’s the way every society in the history of the world has ever worked. But also understand, it is retalitory. Even if you have never done anything against a minority, or even know someone that has, these people do face hate and criticism everyday. Maybe the criticism from the minorities comes in a different channel than that of the majority, but everyone is giving and taking here.
Also I’m really fucking sick of christians thinking they’re so damn persecuted. I was raised in the church, I went to a baptist private school, did awana’ s and missionettes and 5 aspects of a godly woman, and one thing they I heard preached over and over is how persecutede christians were in america. that is utter bullshit people. if you looked around you would realize you fucking run this country. We say we’re not a theocracy and yet there’s “in god we trust” tacked onto our national currency, and “one nation under god” in our pledge of allegiance, and every person who runs for president knows they have to appeal to the christians if they want a vote. but what you also don’t realize is how bad it would be if this country became dictated completely by a certain religion, not just for those who don’t believe but for the other christians too. When a religious organization seizes power it isn’t long until everyone loses their rights and freedoms. Look at how many different denominations of christian there are. You can’t even decide what being a christian exactly is, so why would you think it would be a good idea to make that the final say in all our laws?
ugh. ok
Well put it this way; if that was Allah and the Prophet Mohammad featured in bondage gear, we’d have started World War III.
gah! all my paragraphs got smooched together! i swear i didn’t write it as all one big block of text
Oh come on. You GOTTA appreciate that. That’s awesome.
Sacrilegious and/or gross.
I think that if anyone takes anything that has religious values and use that for “fun”…….. it’s really rude.
It’s like the cartoon of Muhammad, etc.
As a Christ follower I was a little upset but all I can do is pray for the gays.. We need more Christians standing up more in our nation.
I can see many people being angry over it. Personally, I’m not going to throw a fit over it, but I don’t really see how this is going to help sell their product. It seems like the amount of people offend by this will be much greater than the people who see it and go to buy the product. What ever. It’s probably sacreligious, but freedom of speech should keep people from doing anything about it.
~Echoelle
Oh, goodness, Dan! FOX News? You have got to be kidding me. I refuse to answer your question.
I thought it was a great picture, actually. Yeah, reference is there and all, but sometimes you just gotta take art where art comes.
’nuff said…
OK, is the add by Miller or the Folsom Street Fest?
It’s in poor taste. However, it is appropriating the famous DaVinci painting. Are we now elevating DaVinci to be on the same level as Christ?
It is art and art imitates life. Did the Catholic church make a big bru-ha-ha when the Star Wars version of Last Supper came out?
http://www.superchefblog.com/images/starwars_lastsupper.png
The painting isn’t a holy relic. If it was then I might agree with their outrage. You can’t deify everything just because it is a picture of Jesus or another Holy figure.
For once I agree with T_I_I. This is indeed sacreligious and an abomination. It’s disgusting. But they will get struck down in some way for having done this. You don’t blaspheme the Lord and get away with it. It’s bad, bad juju to play with the Lord’s image like this.
elvesdoitbetter
Such a mass of wordy crap, all trying to justify that lamest of all excuses. “They did it first”. Even if I agreed, and I don’t, your momma would have told you the ultimate truth on this subject.
“Two wrongs don’t make a right”
Its horrible. If we did such a thing to an image of Mohammed, muslims would call for apologies….and get them. If we took a photo of Ellen Degeneres and covered it in pig blood, or photoshopped in some kind of hetro image, gay and lesbian groups would go banannas over us denegrating their heroine. Its interesting that they can be so hateful to Christians and no one ever utters the word “hate crime” when they are the ones committing it.
Yes, but we do live in a free speech society.
What the fuck do I care?
no, its just a joke, nothing serious, get over it people.
Normal
0
7.8 磅
0
2
false
false
false
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:普通表格;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
I really like these <a href="links
of London, There are many styles <a href="cheap
links of London, Are so attractive, look <a href="cheap
linksofLondon,I believe you will like these <a href="links
of London necklaec, Wishing you a happy <a href="Links
of London Chains