Crucifixion — Antonello da Messina

Posted on by Biblioklept

Published by Biblioklept

6 thoughts on “Crucifixion — Antonello da Messina”

  1. Definitely not for the tender eyes of Flopsy, Mopsy or Peter Cottontail. Why is Christianity so rife with the bloody sacrifice? If it’s not Jesus, they’re stringing up their neighbor or the strangers who live over the hill.

    I wonder what Jesus really thinks about the whole sado-masochistic frenzy. Mel Gibson is one good lashing shy of being a porn star.

    Eye of newt and tongue of toad…

    Like

  3. Jesus is a friend of mine. The image I have of him is a 5’4″ kinky haired Danny Thomas looking precocious Jewish kid, who is dark brown because he didn’t spend much time indoors with the pious and mealy mouthed, but was out amongst ‘his’ people – the common man.

    But, let me see if I get the adherents’ stories straight – God the Allfather was so taken with a young bride that he had an angel impregnate her with his (god’s) seed. He was born as his own son, as human as you or me. He allowed his earthly flesh to be crucified and killed on the bloody altar because a bloody sacrifice was the only way to atone for the sins of the entire human race, past, present, and future. In case any of us want to go to the paradise of the god of the bloody sacrifice. Can’t get in with any sin.

    After being dead for three days, he came back to life and presented himself to witnesses as immortal yet mortal. Then, after a while, his human flesh body flew off into the sky.

    That’s some psychodrama. As weird as a talking snake. This is the official version?

    I think I prefer the eternal waters of compassionate love. The idea of sitting in church for eternity listening to the word makes me want to squirm.

    I like the part that goes, the hand having writ moveth on.

    Like

  5. You make a good point about French and EU human rights laws, Polichinello. Also, I wendor when the last time was any of these protestors had an eye exam. Have they seen a crucifix recently? What’s worse for a person, to have a bit of chocolate syrup splattered on a painting of him, or to be tortured and executed? I’m not being flip here. Isn’t the whole point of the Easter story, and thus of the liturgical calendar, that Jesus suffers our pains and indignities with us, and that by sharing our sufferings he redeems us? If that is the point, and if the protestors sincerely believe such a point to be true, how could they possibly be offended by an indication that as the character suffers indignity in caring for his father, Jesus suffers the same indignity? I would think that the logic of their position would require them to welcome that aspect of the play. Perhaps they are being illogical. Or perhaps they follow some brand of Christianity which does not regard the Passion of Christ as especially significant. Or perhaps their protest is of the doth protest too much variety, and they have chosen this play to disrupt because it highlights an aspect of Christianity that is too challenging for them to take on board.

    Like

Your thoughts?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.