Is Lady gaga Blasphemous?

[Ghostly]

I know there is already an all Lady Gaga thread but if I were to ask this there it probably wouldn't get much responses.

So what is your opinion on Lady Gaga and her songs and music videos like Alejandro and Judas, for anyone who hasn't heard her new song Judas here is the song

+ YouTube Video

is it blasphemy or just misunderstood? I know that alot of people are not liking the song Judas because she says "I'm in love with Judas" take for example, I just posted this song on facebook and one girl commented "she should burn in the fires of hell -.-"

I personally think the song Judas is a metaphor for an ex-boyfriend who betrayed her just like Judas betrayed Jesus, but she still loves him and forgives him just like Jesus forgave those who hurt him

So what are your opinions on her?

[NickT]

I'unno, with this song it's like she's trying to provoke someone, not that I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.

[Hot Pink]

I'm not sure, either. I'm not religious, so I have nothing against Lady Gaga.

[Emberstone]

well, given the history of christian theology... she talks in public, she wears pants, and owns property... so just by that, the majority of christian teaching and history kinda posists that her existance and behavior is blashphemus.

honestly, I think blasphemy is best described as "religious people don't like people who think for themselves."

I am glad that about the only blasphemy you could commit in my church is to jump onto the lecturn, drop your pants, wave your penis around, and shout "I have got wood, who wants nailed?"

[Mogget]

This is a tricky one. Lady Gaga is definitely trying to be provocative and offend Christians by using sexual language connected with Jesus and by stating her love for a figure associated in Christian tradition with evil.

Thing is, being provocative and offensive isn't blasphemy. Whether you're Ezekiel dining on a meal cooked over human dung, Jeremiah telling the leaders of the city that they will be destroyed like a pot, or a holy fool, the Christian tradition has a definite place for you. So being offensive isn't enough to be blasphemous.

Which brings us to an important questions: what is blasphemy? Blasphemy isn't just doing stuff that's forbidden by religious law: it must have a distinct component of defiling or denying something divine. Two men having sex isn't blasphemy, it's just a sin; it only becomes blasphemous if they do it in church, or have a priest perform the sacrament of marriage before doing it, or similar.

In other words, a Lady Gaga song can only be blasphemous if it has religious content. Which brings us to the case of "Judas." I agree with Vampirekid that Gaga is probably using the character of Judas as a metaphor for her boyfriend; this is not blasphemous. Comparing people to biblical figures has a long and rich history within the Christian tradition.

And if we look at what we see in the song, it's pretty standard stuff. The idea that Jesus would have forgiven Judas has biblical support (Luke 23:24). This is essentially a midrash on the existing text, extending Jesus' forgiveness of the Roman soldiers who put him on the cross to Judas.

There honestly isn't any material in the song that I think could be considered blasphemous.

[partietraumatic]

Anything Madonna did, Lady Gaga must do.

[browneyedboy]

This is a tricky one. Lady Gaga is definitely trying to be provocative and offend Christians by using sexual language connected with Jesus and by stating her love for a figure associated in Christian tradition with evil.

Why would she be trying to offend christians when she herself is one she went to catholic school for most of her school carrier and has always preached about god, just like alejandro and bad romance she is just using a story to relate to a situation about being in a bad relationship and comparing it to judas and jesus as someone said above.

honestly, I think blasphemy is best described as "religious people don't like people who think for themselves."

i agree with this

[Rikudo]

Eh I don't like Gaga.

[RedKnight]

Originally Posted by Rikudo

Eh I don't like Gaga.

I second that

[Pepsi]

She's said that the song was just a metaphor for a boyfriend who betrayed and hurt her so you're pretty much right on the money there. As for this song offending Christians. It isn't offensive at all. It makes references to the bible but not in an offensive way and she isn't saying good things about Judas. She actually only refers to him in a bad way and even calls him a demon. She says she can't help but still love him, which might just be another reference to the bible. Jesus forgave Judas, still loved him. I don't think GaGa was looking for trouble with this song. I think anyone who says this song offended them are the only people starting trouble.

[Beachboi92]

Judas has nothing blasphemous in it. The fact that people where throwing a fit was jumping the gun xD

however the music video for Alejandro definitely had some things that i can see people taking as "blasphemous." But in my opinion the whole idea of "blasphemy" seems ridiculous and has no real logical backing.

[TheRoof]

Originally Posted by partietraumatic

Anything Madonna did, Lady Gaga must do.

this, except madonna is much classier and modest than gaga.

[Bryan90]

Sometimes I have difficulties understanding why certain Christians or other religious groups feel that the bible and their God belongs to them and them only.

I have my own personal relationship with God, and I personally think he is a stupid selfish bastard. There, does that make me blasphemous?

And if anyone wants to have a fantasy of Judas and Jesus, why should other people have a problem with it? You can have your own Jesus, let me have mine! Sharing is caring!

[Phoenix]

People said the same dumb bullshit about Madonna 20 years ago. We all need to take ourselves a little less seriously.

[Beachboi92]

for the record this thread is a "is this song" blasphemous thread not a "do you like lady gaga thread" so lets everyone try not to get on a debate about if she is good or bad or whatever and keep it relevant to the topic. (just saying before this goes where i suspect it will)

[Porphyrogenitus]

Originally Posted by Emberstone

well, given the history of christian theology... she talks in public, she wears pants, and owns property... so just by that, the majority of christian teaching and history kinda posists that her existance and behavior is blashphemus.

I'm sorry, where the hell are you getting that from?

As for the song, I haven't the faintest idea what she's trying to say. The lyrics in the verses are quite nonsensical. So inevitably, everyone's going to make of it what they want, fundamentalists will think she's blaspheming, (certain) fans and atheists will think she's making some sort of metaphorical point, numbers of people in the middle won't care and will get annoyed at having to hear about it. Whether that was her plan, or she was just oblivious, idk.

Originally Posted by Emberstone

honestly, I think blasphemy is best described as "religious people don't like people who think for themselves."

Agreed. Well, in this case that is the case. In others not so much.

Originally Posted by partietraumatic

Anything Madonna did, Lady Gaga must do.

Originally Posted by Rikudo

Eh I don't like Gaga.

Originally Posted by RedKnight

I second that

Originally Posted by JRNY

this, except madonna is much classier and modest than gaga.

No one cares, that's not the topic of the thread.

Originally Posted by Phoenix

People said the same dumb bullshit about Madonna 20 years ago. We all need to take ourselves a little less seriously.

Me gusta.

[aidan]

Originally Posted by Beachboi92

But in my opinion the whole idea of "blasphemy" seems ridiculous and has no real logical backing.

qft

[partietraumatic]

Originally Posted by Gothitil

No one cares, that's not the topic of the thread.

Actually my Madonna comment does relate to the thread. Madonna did it, people complained and called it blasphemous. The same applies now as it did then, conservative Christians like to object to certain public figures and call them anti-Christian. Ever has it been thus.

[Zontar]

The real answer is, does anyone really care about blasphemy anymore? It's not the 1500s. We have freedom of speech. Deal with it.