In a message dated 01-02-20 15:04:04 EST, Ellen Cutler wrote:

<< Tammy Hindle finds the photograph "beautiful."  Everton McIntyre finds the
 photograph offensive because its effect contradicts the image he holds in
 his head and his heart and because the Jesus figure is portrayed nude (and,
 McIntyre tells us, "Jesus was never nude").  It is interesting that he does
 not say that the problem is that Jesus is shown as a woman, and that
 Pentecostal beliefs holds that Jesus is a man (as in Adam and not Eve). >>

While most of this post was interesting and thoughtful, I found the above
statement rather curious, and I'm struggling to find the point.  The belief
that Jesus was a man is hardly a uniquely Pentecostal position.  The only
evidence we have for Jesus's existence--the Bible and a few miscellaneous
non-biblical references--agree unequivocally that he was a man.  As in Adam
and Eve?  What does that mean?  It would be just about as useful to state
that Masonic beliefs hold that George Washington was a man (as in John Smith
and Pocahontas?).  Or, if you consider Jesus a mythical or literary figure
rather than historical, you might also say Nordic literary critics' beliefs
hold that Beowulf was a man...

I personally have no problem with artistic license.  A painting of George
Washington as a nude woman crossing the Delaware would be fine with me.

David Haberstich

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).