Giant Jesus With 20-Inch Penis Causes Catholic Crisis
A new 10-foot high crucifix featuring a well-endowed Jesus on the Cross in the indulgent Italian Baroque style has stirred an incredible uproar in the small Oklahoma town of Warr Acres. The flashy gold depiction of our Savoir was installed at the St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church on February 21st and while Catholicism has been known for its embellished forms of worship, many think this is going too far. The work of art may be flattering to a select few, but the majority believes that it causes a unwanted distraction during service, most notably for the church’s pastor, Father Phillip Seeton. Others question the timing of displaying an exuberantly crafted Jesus when the church is suffering from numerous public sex abuse scandals involving members of the clergy.
The cross was created by artist Janet Jaime and was meant to be an homage to a similar work in Assisi, Italy created at the height of the Catholic Church’s most flamboyant era, a time when that institution employed the likes of Michelangelo and Leonardo DaVinci, who were later discovered to be notorious homosexuals (which explains the excessive amount of male nudity in their work). Warr Acres, with a population just shy of 10,000, is on the outskirts of Oklahoma City and is home to a branch of the famous Charleston’s Restaurant, which serves a delicious chicken fried steak.
- Sinful
- Suspicious
- Scared
- Sad
- Amused
- Laughing Out Loud
Author: Stephenson Billings
Stephenson Billings is an Investigative Journalist, Motivational Children's Party Entertainer and Antique Soda Bottle Collector all in one special, blessed package! Facebook me here or Fanmail me: StephensonBillings@yahoo.com !
9:00 pm
i like it, isee you cant take a joke..
there is no god
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
11
9:29 am
This is no joke.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
14
10:06 pm
The male penus belongs either in hiding or in a virgin’s vagina! NOT ON CHRIST!
I pray that yer souls are delived from Christ’s genetailia.
Parise American Jesus!
Praise or Condemn:
4 
3
9:07 pm
Stevie, is your mouth watering, or is your ass twitching in anticipation?
I bet your ass quivers for that cock…
Hot debate. What do you think?
26 
5
9:27 am
That’s really a disgusting thing to say. Childish.
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
25
9:17 pm
I’m seriously starting to believe the idea of this site is to start a massive troll fight. hahah.
Praise or Condemn:
8 
11
9:30 pm
Maybe I didn’t explain myself clearly enough with this article. Many of us Baptists find certain issues with how the Catholics conduct their faith. Catholics traditionally persecuted Baptists and to this day there is uneasiness between the two, though they share wonderful faith in common. There are too many points to list here, not the least of which is the pomp and circumstance of Catholic ceremony, the taking of sacrament as a way to infuse the human body with that of our Lord, and the worshipping of icons. That is what I have a specific problem as I point out here. Many Christian but non-Catholic churches lack the fancy, flamboyant statuary and architecture that the Papists have. We don’t have priests who wear rich, velvet gowns and carry around solid gold chalices. The humility of the Baptists is exhibited in the simplicity of our faith. Namely, our personal relationship with our Lord Jesus Christ. I’m sorry to cause any controversy here, and I do know many wonderful Catholics who join in our Christian discussion, but sometimes I’m a little cranky and I can’t hold my tongue, particularly when it comes to these outrageous gold icons like the one above. You would never see something like this in a Baptist church, but it’s pretty common for the Catholics.
Praise or Condemn:
11 
8
9:35 pm
Hahah, fair enough stevie. As a fellow christian, and a bisexual, im curious now – what is your fixation on anything that has to do with homosexuality, the male genitalia, or pedophiles? I mean, really, You got the worlds biggest book (the bible) to work with, yet you focus on homosexuality, something jesus christ himself never either condemned or (directly) supported. That’s why i said what i did. Not accusing anything here, but it just comes off as a little odd to me.
Praise or Condemn:
17 
1
9:41 pm
Quite simply, I have dedicated my life to saving children from the lure of homosexuality. Everyone should have a passion. This is mine. It’s a decent and honorable thing and I’m not the only one in the Christian community who has dedicated his life to this important issue (Peter LaBarbera is another). Some focus on abortion, some on fighting homelessness, I guess this is my cause and I take it very personally.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
13
9:47 pm
Well, quite frankly, i have to say i feel you’re preaching to the choir on that one. Should take a read on this – http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm
Praise or Condemn:
6 
5
3:17 am
>>> Quite simply, I have dedicated my life to saving children from the lure of homosexuality.
Go fuck yourself buddy. What you need to be doing is loving and accepting someone regardless of something as inalienable as green eyes or black skin. Its idiots like you damaging children for the rest of their life over a few random obscure phrases in a book that repeatedly, over and over again, endorses slavery, has instructions on how to sell your daughter, among others. You want to do something worthwhile? FEED THE POOR, CLOTHE THE NAKED, GIVE COMFORT TO THE SICK AND SHUT THE FUCK UP. And if you should happen to consider damaging yet another young homosexual consider some of these passages first:
Moral Law as it applies to man
Exodus 35:2 – Those who don’t respect the sabbath should be executed
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 – non-virgin brides should be executed
Exodus 21:7 – It’s ok to sell your children into slavery
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 – Premarital sex forces marriage ie rape victims must marry their attackers
Exodus 21:20-21 – Beat your slaves within an inch of their life
1 Timothy 2:11-12, 1 Corinthians 14 :34 – women should be silent
Miscellaneous
Luke 16:17 – All biblical law is completely non-voidable
Matthew 5:17 – Jesus’ arrival doesn’t change any old laws
Praise or Condemn:
17 
3
2:19 am
Foreword: I love these articles for they make me laugh so. I read them for the lulz and I read the comments for more. While many things you’ve said in the past may have applied to me, they did not offend me. Insulting Catholicism and art, however, really has me a bit irritated.
Point-by-point:
1) Catholics didn’t traditionally persecute Baptists. When the Catholic Church went around persecuting people, we persecuted Jews, Muslims, Pagans, and Protestants. The Baptist movement began in England in 1609 – at this point England was Anglican so there couldn’t have been Catholic persecution. Baptist thought then moved with the Puritans to America – Catholicism was never strong enough to persecute people in America until maybe the Irish Potato Famine in the 1800s and by that time we Catholics had become bored of setting up Inquisitions and partaking in Crusades.
2)Would you believe that there exist Catholic churches that are plain? In fact most of them are plain. Take a look at the churches that sprouted up when the Irish immigrated to America – or how about the churches built by the Hispanics – or how about the modern ones – or, you know, anything that isn’t a Cathedral or Basilica. As for rich, velvet gowns and gold chalices: are you kidding? I’ve seen more than my fair share of pewter and brass and wooden chalices. Believe it or not in Catholicism the material doesn’t matter at all. If it did how would we be able to send missionaries to third world countries to proselytize? And rich, velvet gowns? Give me a break: most are cotton just like a t-shirt. You’re taking what is seen in Cathedrals on Christmas day and what is seen at the Vatican and calling it the norm. Besides what is so wrong with wanting to honor your God with art and beauty? By that logic, singing shouldn’t be allowed in churches because it’s frivolous and one can easily commune with God via silent prayer.
4) Simplicity is not a synonym for humility. Humility is not assuming you’re right and everyone else is wrong and going to burn in hellfire (which I’m aware I will). Humble is accepting that you may in fact be wrong. Humble is not arrogantly assuming that you’re the end all and be all of religious thought. Humble is giving your time to people without thought of thanks or reward.
5) I’m sorry but you don’t know many wonderful Catholics. I know this because if you have to “hold your tongue” on issues that blatantly say “Catholics you’re completely misguided and wrong” then clearly you think of them as lesser people. An analogy: a person holds their tongue when in the presence of a colored man because they don’t want to offend said man by saying something racist — is the person racist? Yes. The fact that you thought something racist makes you one: the ability to self-censor doesn’t change the way you think about someone nor does it change who you are. You don’t like Catholics and think of us a misguided little children. I mean you separate us from “Christian”. You don’t even think we’re Christian! Don’t give me this “Oh I’m so innocent, look I have a Catholic friend” thing. Racists do the same thing with their “Mexicans should mow my lawn. No, it’s okay, I’m not racist — look I’m friends with Alejandro Moreno here.” Stop lying to yourself and to your audience.
6)HAHAHAHAHAHA Oh so ten-foot golden-plated dicks are in my church? Let me tell you something: NEVER have I EVER seen a 20in dick on any representation of Jesus in any church. Oh but maybe that’s because my little local churches aren’t as flamboyant? Oh wait, no. I’ve been to the Vatican, I’ve been to more Cathedrals and Basilicas around the country and the world than I can count on two hands. Guess what? No 20in dicks. Well except the Sistine Chapel but, honestly, we can’t fault Michaelangelo here, the men he was depicting were over twenty feet tall – so it’s still proportional (do a quick math check – six foot man with a five inch penis multiply by four and we get a 24 foot man with a 20 inch phallus).
Miscellaneous:
Are you seriously trying to insinuate that Michaelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci were anything but two of the greatest artists the world has ever seen? Michaelangelo’s working is nothing short of genius: the Sistine Chapel is beautiful and awe-inspiring, the level of detail and the knowledge of perception that he shows is astounding. And the Pieta? Good God man. What he has captured in a single block of stone is nothing short of perfection. As for Da Vinci — gay or not he was one of the greatest minds to walk this earth. His ideas for flight, armaments, power generation, double-hulled ships, and the calculator; his knowledge of male AND female anatomy; and his knowledge of plate tectonics, hydrodynamics, optics, and civil engineering were all eons ahead of his time.
And as for there apparent desire to use males in their artwork: are you daft? Let’s look at Leonardo for a second here, his works include: the Virgin of the Rocks (female), the Last Supper (are you really going to say this is indicative of homosexuality?), the Mona Lisa (female), the Virgin and Child with St. Anne (female), the Vetruvian Man (male), a few portraits of women (including one in the National Gallery of Art in D.C.), and slew of saints and other Biblical scenes. WOW, look at that predilection for men! Now, on Michaelangelo you’ve got me. His art was primarily male in gender. Oh well I guess all his beautiful works like the frescoes of Sistine Chapel, the Pieta, and David are all vile now that Michaelangelo is homosexual.
Sincerely,
An art lover, a bad Catholic, a denizen of the internet, a victim of trolls, an engineer, and a man with at least a shred of common sense
PS: Keep writing articles like the one on Sodomy. I loved it. Seriously. Sodomy is equivalent to MTV and cigarettes. I laughed for at least three minutes. Keep up the good work.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:33 pm
are those ladies on the sides getting up close to get a good look at it?
Praise or Condemn:
9 
2
2:51 am
I want that cock!
Praise or Condemn:
11 
2
3:05 am
huh a cock without Phalus yeah whatever I think it’s his belly ( muscular belly ) not his cock
Praise or Condemn:
2 
12
9:10 am
HAHAHAHA do you even know what a PENIS looks like, or abdominal muscles for that matter? What else I find funny is that albeit being jewish, the artist left Jesus un-circumsized. Boy are they going to “Hell” for that one
Praise or Condemn:
11 
0
9:04 am
jesus is so gangsta letting his short hang down low like that and he just showing off his stiffy to his girls.
Praise or Condemn:
9 
1
9:07 am
It’s not Italian Baroque style, it’s a cheap attempt to copy a Giotto’s Style Crucifix, who was an italian gothic painter. Actually the best one of his era. Michelangelo and Da Vinci came something like 2 centuries after Giotto and Cimabue (Giotto’s Teacher and Mentor), there is no proof of them being homosexual and there is no excessive nudity in Da Vinci’s works excepts his books and studies about human anatomy.
Praise or Condemn:
9 
3
9:25 am
I’m sorry but I find that depiction rather rough, nowhere near realistic. I don’t know how you can say this person was “the best.” You don’t have a clue about art, unfortunately. Look at the other figures, they’re completely out of proportion and yet they’re modeled with the same detail? Are they in the background? It doesn’t look like it! Foreground right there!
And don’t you think all that gold is just a bit showy? Why must they get so flamboyant and over the top like that? Catholics are way too much into pomp for their own good.
Regarding the homosexuality, Michelangelo’s writings did indeed prove his male sexual attraction. Another great indicator is the fact that the man didn’t know how to create a naked woman! His naked women were actually male models with odd looking breasts clamped on. They don’t look at all like girls because this man had ZERO experience around girls. But the men, oh gosh, there are naked and muscly men everywhere in Michel’s world. He was obsessed with every curve and dip in a man’s body.
Same goes for Leonardo. The church even had some doubts about his work because it was too homosexual. They knew what way he bent even back then!
So stop trying to your crazy art theories on us here. I know you’re probably still in that art history lecture course at college, but this is graduate level scholoarship right here my friend!
Praise or Condemn:
5 
8
9:42 am
I haven’t said that this period of history of art is absolutely the best, I’m a huge fan of impressionism, abstractism and futurism, actually I don’t really appreciate Giotto and I don’t consider him as the best painter of the world, but art historians, specialized in this period which goes around from 1200 a.D. to 1390 a.D. state that Giotto and Cimabue were the best painter of this period.
And I repeat, as far as I have studied history of arts (which means something like ten years), I read only once about homosexuality in the regards of Michelangelo and they were suppositions.
And by the way who cares? Both Da Vinci and Michelangelo created some of the most astounding pieces of art of the world!
For the “odd looking girls”, you’re talking about a period of arts called Mannerism, everything looked odd in this particular moment.
Praise or Condemn:
10 
3
5:48 pm
Impression just looks too fruity to me, and out of focus (have you ever seen any of that stuff close up? I mean, come on!). Abstraction is just lazy, dots and splatter, it’s a perfect symbol of how low has gone. I love realism! And heroism! Futurism? I’ve never heard of it but it sounds annoying and cartoonish.
As for Giotto.” Giotto’s art shares many qualities with Roman paintings of the later 13th century. Cimabue may have been working in Rome in this period, and there was an active local school of fresco” See, I can cut and paste from Wikipedia too, you lazy fool! That still doesn’t make him great because I can see with my eyes that he doesnt know how to paint and the shapes are all wrong and that body just looks mighty funny shaped. This is the problem with you artists and all the art schools you guys get so much in your heads you forget about what the people thepublic the people who go to museums what they want to see! Like the teabaggers telling our govertment to stop the craziness and tax hikes and Obamacare, its the same with you art people who want gold naked men with giant pensises or a poop on a canvas and say let’s pay him a million dollars and show this at the fanciest museum in town. You people are destroying wasting this country with your immature insanity, stealing money from the federal budgeted projects so you can buy crack and girls (or boys) or who knows what else. Modern art has always been an excuse for creepy guys to have sex. That’s it, you pervert.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
12
5:18 am
First of all, I’m not an art student, nor an artist, I actually can’t draw anything, I’m totally unable. Second, in Italy History of Arts is a compulsory subject in every school grade, from Elementary to High School. Third, I haven’t cut and paisted anything from Wikipedia, I just live in the places these artists worked and saw them, studied them and I know stuff about history of arts.
Futurism is an artistic current based almost exclusively in Italy, maybe that’s why you haven’t heard of it. And it’s not lazy, it’s about movement and the study of motions in mechanic stuff and human beings, but not only that.
You talk about realism? Man, do you know that all the “realist” painters had a standard model to which they looked to? Look at all the neoclassical painters! All the faces look alike!
BTW, about the “what people want to see” stuff. Well, look to the basic manual of history of arts: you will see that it is divided in eras and currents. Every century had its own current of paintings, sculpting and that’s because the people wanted to see this kind of stuff. In medieval art and painting you will never see anything except for religious subjects, only with the reinassence you will notice that someone finally started paiting something else!
Museums that gather all the possible paintings and sculptures without dividing them basing on the theme, well, that’s just lame! Come here, in Italy, where art has a huge meaning, come and visist any of the museums here in Rome or Milan, you will never see Da Vinci beside Ingres or Degas, like sometimes it happens in the US. People want to see Da Vinci and stuff like that? There is a museum for that period of art. People want to see something else, like impressionism and contemporary art? Well, there is a museum for that too.
And I repeat, different eras, different paintings. Reinassence and Mannerism bus most of all the latter, considered the exageration of the tracts of the human body the highest achievment in their paintings, because the subjects had to look perfect, considered the philosophy of the time. If only you had attended to a art class you would know it. And you call me lame?
Praise or Condemn:
9 
1
1:10 pm
“He was obsessed with every curve and dip in a man’s body.”
The pot’s calling the kettle black.
Praise or Condemn:
19 
0
7:58 pm
I see, this is what they meant by “Jesus was HUNG on the cross”.
I realize he was the son of God, but not part horse.
Praise or Condemn:
15 
2
8:00 pm
Zing.
Praise or Condemn:
11 
1
10:29 pm
Really? That’s more like elephant.
Praise or Condemn:
6 
2
8:07 pm
I have a masters degree in art history. To me, the flatness of the painting as well as the fact it is a triptych looks like it was either painted in the early Renaissance, or maybe it was just painted to look like that style.
The thing about the dark ages is that artist never painted from real life, they painted from memory.
During the renaissance, they painted from real life and real models. Before that, they had to guess what people even looked like without shirts on. So in affect, during the proto-Renaissance, you get very stiff and unrealistic forms because people didn’t understand or know how to paint the human form realistically. So I doubt this artist knew what he/she was doing.
Praise or Condemn:
10 
0
8:21 pm
The poster of this article is INCORRECT on the era of this painting. In my expert opinion, the artist did not know how to correctly paint the human form. This is a Byzantine-style painting, not a Italian Baroque style painting.
During this era, painters did not know much about gradient shading, foreshortening or even the human form (they painted from memory) and oil painting hadn’t even been invented yet. It is really crucial to get your facts correct before you start spouting nonsense about the artist being homosexual, or purposely putting in such nonsense.
The Baroque era was far more realistic. Just look at a Caravaggio painting, they look almost like photographs.
Praise or Condemn:
7 
5
8:28 pm
I don’t need some fancy “masters dergee” to tell that this thing is garbage.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
10
8:33 pm
Your article saying that this painting was done in the Baroque period is like saying that the Civil war happened in the 1600′s. There is no excuse for such a glaring error. If you had done a wee bit of research, you could have found out when the this painting was actually painted, and why the artist made the mistake he did.
Praise or Condemn:
7 
5
8:52 pm
I’m sorry but I have to say this. I’m sure you want to be a perfectly nice person and all but tromping around this website proclaiming how intelligent you are with all this college education doesn’t make you sound impressive. Just uppity. This was a perfectly descriptive article and what I wrote makes sense to the majority of decent, normal people who read it. Your technical mumbo jumbo is just a pain in my neck, you want to put a decent religious writer down because you have my faith. Well, that;s just offensive. You have no right whatsoever to attack me like this. I happen to know what I’m talking about.
And for your information baroque means overcooked and flamboyant, too much ornate and gold. Thats exactly what this guy is. It’s too much and its clearly Italian. The Italians are a bit dark skinned and notoriously Catholic. Thats part of the problem. And we all know about the sex issues. I mean they’re destroying Christianity with all that homosexuality in the church. There are literally millions of Italian and Catholic homosexuals. And then they create this thing with his big dong? You think that’s a coincidence? You’re crazy sweetheart. And you don’t know a thing about anything.
Yes, this is wrong and should be condemned. It’s that simple! Why do you want to go off and be all art history, well that’s just sad. It’s really not appropriate and what kind of life is that particularly when we’re living in tough economic times when the country is suffering and evryone needs to do there part and here you are just wasting the taxpaper dime in some ivory tower on the federal funds. I can’t wrap my head around that one.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
10
1:43 pm
Sir, you just wrote the worst bullshit I read on this page.
which is a Caravaggio’s painting, it’s located in San Luigi Dei Francesi church in Rome, between Piazza Navona and the palace of the Senate (Palazzo Madama).
Baroque is a word mutuated from spanish which means “elaborate”, not “overcooked and flamboyant” and doesn’t involve “too much ornate and gold”. The crucifix is a copy or elaboration of a pre-reinassence crucifix like this
The Baroque period started in 1500 and holds its most important painters in Caravaggio, Rubens, Bernini, Veermer and many more. An example of a baroque painting is
There’s a huge difference between the two paintings. As Annie said, painters before reinassence painted and drawed without a real life model, anatomy studies were forbidden by the Church so it’s quite obvious that the tracts and the proportions are not respected.
Praise or Condemn:
7 
4
2:46 pm
What are you talking about? I don’t see a giant phallus on either of those pictures.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
9
10:36 pm
Actually, you said that college is a good thing, and that all intelligent men should go to it, while you were flaming women’s rights. Again. But, the reason that all those other European and Asian countries are pulling ahead of us in education is that they have very good colleges, or go to our very good colleges. Maybe if you had actually payed attention to something other than other boys in school, you would have gone to college, too, and then this site might make an ounce of sense.
Praise or Condemn:
5 
4
3:50 am
@Billings
I guess he was talking about your incompetence in distinguishing two different art periods.
Praise or Condemn:
8 
0
8:37 pm
Of course you donn need no fancy book larnin’ you got JEeesus!
Praise or Condemn:
11 
2
9:14 pm
Poe’s law, plain and simple. and gay pets, really?
Praise or Condemn:
3 
5
9:23 pm
Don’t pull that nonsense on me. Crawl back under your rock.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
5
9:30 pm
You are a great satirist (maybe rivaling stephen Colbert)! I haven’t found poe this good in a long while. C’mon this has to be a HUGE joke.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
6
9:38 pm
Ugggghhh…. don’t mention that name to me. He’s an absolute failure that I put in his place once, long ago:
http://christwire.org/2009/08/do-you-really-think-you’re-that-funny-stephen-colbert/
Praise or Condemn:
7 
3
9:41 pm
Put in his place? HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! You wish!
Praise or Condemn:
11 
1
9:41 pm
Ok. You aren’t poe, then why do comments like “I see, this is what they meant by “Jesus was HUNG on the cross”.
I realize he was the son of God, but not part horse.”
Have praises only, and no condemns? I find it hard to believe you haven’t gotten to them yet. You probably thumbed them up yourself.
Praise or Condemn:
4 
6
11:37 pm
Well I can’t help what people post and up vote here. We have been listed on several atheist sites and they like to come over here and quiz us. The wonderful thing about it that I think through the constant engagement we may be tempting a few of these children to experience faith. If you win just one soul, that’s a wonderful thing.
Praise or Condemn:
7 
3
10:43 pm
It’s ridiculous how all the gays are showing up here and trying to defend this painting as if it was an innocent mistake.
Praise or Condemn:
6 
3
10:52 pm
Now jesus is molesting kids. Crazy religous people.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
3
9:33 pm
Finally some porn on this site!
Praise or Condemn:
4 
1
10:12 pm
Perhaps we should not simply point and say “That’s Wrong!” we should first ask ourselves what is our problem with genitalia? Do we know? Why do we find it offensive? In context, what makes it different from an elbow?
In all honesty, why are we constantly ashamed of ourselves and our bodies?
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
10:13 pm
Jesus’s peenus was sent to rehdeem mankind. Not penitrait it with it’s phallicy!
Praise or Condemn:
4 
0
11:57 pm
ok i have somethng to say here for one thing….
jesus christ did not permit homosexuality cause it clearly states in the
bibal that its against nature it self and is condsidered a sin
god wanted man to love women not women to women or man to man
cause i mean come on u idiots thinking stevie is dumb is really
a shame im a frigan 17 year old and i know that for a fact that.
homosexuality is wrong cause if jesus wanted a homo then why would
he place adam and eve togeather now take time to think about that
and the part were u saying that he is corrupting children u all
plumb stupid for that… and thats a fact i know this cause im a
darn christian and i been taugh these things u all should study
ur bibal a lil bit more mabe u will learn the truth or not its up to u
cause from the way it sounds ur sighing ur own ticket to hell and trust me
i dont think u will like being with lucifer cause it clearly states there is
nine circles of hell and which ever one u all talking about ur will be going to one of them
thats for sure so my advice dont mock the bibal cause stevie has a BIG POINT!!!!!!!!!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
12:09 am
I have this to say, why would god have made assholes so easy to get a penis stuck into them? Why do males have them when they could have something else to remove waste that cant have a penis in it? Also, many people are not christian so mabey they dont really WANT to read a bible? And, just to say this, im a christian and instead of spewing hate over the interwebs, i have love for all people, like the bible you told me to study says.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
2
9:55 pm
It’s clear to me some of you have no clue about iconography. First of all, showing detailed torso is not unusual in Orthodox icons. However, the penis is NEVER shown in an icon, irregardless of perceived size. This is not a genuine icon. ths is someone’s attempt to mock our Lord. As an Orthodox Christian, I think that is truly a shame.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
11:08 pm
I’ve never seen a penis depicted as such in any time period. You’re just looking for a reason to be pissed at something. Any logical person with half a wit would know right off the bat that this painting isn’t meant to deface the Lord.
That is not a penis and you know it.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
10:58 pm
It’s no cause to have an uproar because it’s really your dirty mind perceiving it to be a penis. It’s fairly obvious those are his abs.
Ask any 3 year old Christian girl if there’s anything wrong with this picture and chances are she won’t point out the ‘penis’
Grow up, kids.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
7:20 am
I think that is his stomach as well. Who ever depicted this was not a very skilled artist, this is very obvious. For that to be his genitalia it is extremely dis proportionate. It looks like he has elephantitis. If I say this crucifix with out any previous conception I would assume they were badly depicted ab muscles. Why would Jesus be wearing his man skirt and still have his genitalia showing? It makes no sense.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
4:44 am
It’s his stomach muscles! Good grief people! Get your minds out of the gutter!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0