Was Trump’s so-called ‘Jesus’ image blasphemy? A religious expert explains
,

特朗普所谓的“耶稣”形象是亵渎吗?一位宗教专家解释

Was Trump’s so-called ‘Jesus’ image blasphemy? A religi…

Philip C. Almond, Emeritus Professor in the History of Religious Thought, The University of Queensland

Donald Trump’s AI image of himself looking like Jesus has been widely derided as blasphemous. But what exactly is blasphemy?

唐纳德·特朗普的AI自画像被广泛嘲讽为亵渎。但亵渎到底是什么?

This week, Donald Trump posted an AI image of himself dressed in white robes, placing a glowing hand over an ill or deceased man in a hospital bed, as if to heal or resurrect him. The image, posted on Truth Social, was widely taken as him presenting himself as a Messianic Jesus figure.

本周,唐纳德·特朗普发布了一张人工智能图片,照片中他身着白色长袍,将一只发光的手放在病床上生病或已故的男子身上,仿佛要治愈或复活他。这张发布在Truth Social上的图片,被广泛解读为他将自己塑造成了弥赛亚耶稣形象。

Sometime the next morning, he deleted the post. “I thought it was me as a doctor,” he explained to reporters, according to Time magazine. Jesus? “Only the fake news could come up with that one.”

到了第二天早上,他删除了这篇帖子。《时代》杂志援引消息称,他向记者解释说:“我以为我是在扮演一名医生。” 耶稣?“只有假新闻能想出这种事。”

But the post was widely interpreted as blasphemous – including by conservative Catholic group CatholicVote.org.

但该帖子被广泛解读为亵渎——包括保守天主教团体CatholicVote.org也持此看法。

“I don’t know if the President thought he was being funny or if he is under the influence of some substance or what possible explanation he could have for this OUTRAGEOUS blasphemy,” declared Megan Basham, a prominent conservative Protestant Christian writer, on X. “But he needs to take this down immediately and ask for forgiveness from the American people and then from God.”

一位著名的保守派新教基督教作家梅根·巴尚在X上宣称:“我不知道总统是觉得好笑,还是受到某种物质的影响,或者他能为这种骇人听闻的亵渎行为给出什么可能的解释。但他需要立即删除这个帖子,向美国人民,然后再向上帝请求原谅。”

“I was very grateful to see how many conservative Christians immediately denounced the blasphemous Jesus/Trump image,” said pastor Doug Wilson, who recently led a prayer service at the Pentagon and founded the network of churches War Secretary Pete Hegseth belongs to.

“我非常感激看到如此多保守派基督徒立即谴责了这种亵渎的耶稣/特朗普形象,”牧师道格·威尔逊说。他最近在五角大楼主持了祈祷仪式,并且创立了战争部长皮特·赫格塞斯所属的教会网络。

What is blasphemy?

亵渎是什么?

Within the Christian tradition, blasphemy has historically been an unstable, shifting idea. But, simply put, it means speech, thought or action that shows contempt for – or mockery of – God and sacred matters.

在基督教传统中,亵渎在历史上一直是一个不稳定、不断变化的观念。但简单来说,它指的是对上帝和神圣事务表现出蔑视或嘲弄的言语、思想或行为。

Judaism and Christianity’s concept of blasphemy came from the injunction in the Old Testament not to revile God. Within the Old Testament, it was treated as a crime, punishable by death: “One who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death; the whole congregation shall stone the blasphemer.”

犹太教和基督教关于亵渎的概念源于《旧约》中不亵渎上帝的诫命。在《旧约》中,这被视为一种罪行,可判处死刑:“凡亵渎耶和华之名的人,应死;全会众要石头打那亵渎者。”

The New Testament expanded the concept to include the rejection of Jesus. Eventually, cursing, reproaching, challenging, mocking, rejecting or denying Jesus became blasphemous.

《新约》将这一概念扩展到包括拒绝耶稣。最终,诅咒、指责、挑战、嘲弄、拒绝或否认耶稣的行为都成了亵渎。

More particularly, posing as Jesus or asserting powers that belong only to him was considered blasphemous in medieval times. The “Christs” that emerged were treated harshly, as dangerous heretics. This is where Trump’s presentation of himself as Jesus would undoubtedly be considered blasphemous.

更具体地说,在中世纪,冒充耶稣或宣称只有他才拥有的权能被认为是亵渎的。“出现的‘基督’们”受到了严厉对待,被视为危险的异端。这就是特朗普将自己描绘成耶稣,无疑会被认为是亵渎的行为。

Broadly, anything said or done that offended believers could be construed as blasphemous. Catholics at the time of the Reformation in the 16th century tended to brand those who offended them as heretics.

广义上,任何冒犯信徒的言语或行为都可以被解读为亵渎。在16世纪宗教改革时期,天主教徒倾向于将冒犯他们的人贴上异端的标签。

Protestants generally preferred the term blasphemy for anything they disliked or disagreed with. For example, 16th century theologian Martin Luther – a seminal figure in the Protestant Reformation – condemned as blasphemous not only Catholics, but also Jews and Muslims.

新教徒通常倾向于用“亵渎”一词来指代任何他们不喜欢或不同意的事物。例如,16世纪的神学家马丁·路德——一位新教改革运动的代表人物——谴责的亵渎对象不仅包括天主教徒,还包括犹太人和穆斯林。

Blasphemy as sin or crime

亵渎罪作为罪过或犯罪

Figure
James Nayler. Britannica
詹姆斯·内勒。百科全书

From the 17th century onwards, blasphemy became not so much an offence against God as one against society. Within the unstable societies of early modern Europe, blasphemy was viewed as socially and politically subversive and prosecuted as such. The Quaker James Naylor was imprisoned in 1656 for reenacting Jesus’s entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday.

从17世纪开始,亵渎罪不再是针对上帝的罪行,而更多是针对社会的罪行。在早期现代欧洲不稳定的社会中,亵渎罪被视为具有社会和政治颠覆性,并因此受到起诉。清教徒詹姆斯·内勒于1656年因重演耶稣在棕枝主日进入耶路撒冷的事件而被监禁。

Early in the 17th century, blasphemy crossed to the United States. Virginia’s first law code specified death for blaspheming the divine Trinity.

17世纪初,亵渎罪传入美国。弗吉尼亚州的最初法典规定,亵渎神圣三位一体罪可判处死刑。

Despite the first amendment to the US constitution, protecting free speech, blasphemy laws were regularly enacted. The US Supreme Court didn’t rule that laws against blasphemy infringed the right to free speech until after World War II. Several states still have blasphemy on their books.

尽管美国宪法第一修正案保护了言论自由,但亵渎罪法律仍定期制定。直到第二次世界大战后,美国最高法院才裁定反对亵渎罪的法律侵犯了言论自由的权利。许多州至今仍有亵渎罪的法律。

England’s Blasphemy Act of 1697, which criminalised the denial of the Holy Trinity, the truth of Christianity, or the divine authority of the Bible, carried over into the colonies of Australia and New Zealand.

英国1697年的《亵渎罪法案》将否认圣三一、基督教真理或《圣经》神圣权威的行为定为犯罪,该法律也延伸到了澳大利亚和新西兰的殖民地。

Blasphemy is no longer an offence under Australian federal law, though laws governing it vary across the states: it’s still in the criminal code of many of them. New Zealand’s criminal code deals with “blasphemous libel” as part of “crimes against religion, morality and public welfare”.

亵渎罪已不再是澳大利亚联邦法律下的罪行,尽管各州管辖的法律有所不同:它仍然包含在许多州的刑法典中。新西兰的刑法典将“亵渎性诽谤”作为“危害宗教、道德和公共福利的罪行”的一部分进行处理。

Is there blasphemy in Islam?

伊斯兰教中有亵渎行为吗?

Within Islam, there is no exact equivalent to “blasphemy”. But the idea of the “word of infidelity” is analogous to it. In practice, it amounts to mockery of God, the prophet, or the Islamic tradition generally.

在伊斯兰教中,没有“亵渎”的精确对应物。但“不忠言论”的概念与此类似。实际上,它等同于嘲弄真主、先知或伊斯兰传统本身。

So, when Trump mockingly declared “Praise be to Allah” in a recent post, he was guilty of blasphemy in Muslim eyes. Conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza compared it to the Old Testament account of the prophet Elijah, who mocked the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18.

因此,当特朗普在最近的一篇帖子中嘲讽地宣称“赞颂真主”时,在穆斯林看来,他犯了亵渎罪。保守派评论员迪内什·迪苏萨将其比作《旧约》中关于先知以利亚的记载,后者嘲讽了《列王纪上》第18章中的巴尔先知。

The Islamic advocacy group Council on American-Islamic Relations called it “disturbing” and “offensive to Muslims”.

伊斯兰倡导组织美国伊斯兰关系委员会称其“令人不安”且“对穆斯林构成冒犯”。

Laws against blasphemy are actively enforced in many modern Islamic states.

许多现代伊斯兰国家都在积极执行反对亵渎的法律。

Does blasphemy matter?

亵渎是否重要?

It is not blasphemous to speak or publish opinions that are hostile to Christianity, Judaism or Islam – or for that matter, any religion. What matters is not so much the substance of criticism as the manner in which it is made.

发表或发表反对基督教、犹太教或伊斯兰教——或者说任何宗教的观点,本身并不构成亵渎。重要的是批评的内容本身,不如重要的是其表达的方式。

We should only worry when criticism becomes a form of “religious hate speech”. The question we should ask is about intent. In a secular society, where we do identify ill intent, we may wish to think about “blasphemy” as a matter of public morality, not theology.

只有当批评演变成“宗教仇恨言论”时,我们才应该担心。我们应该问的问题是意图。在一个能够识别恶意意图的世俗社会中,我们更愿意将“亵渎”视为公共道德问题,而非神学问题。

So, what about Donald Trump’s post? Does it matter?

那么,唐纳德·特朗普的帖子如何呢?这重要吗?

If we consider “blasphemy” to include the mocking of religion, there is little doubt that Trump’s mockery of Islam is blasphemous. If we believe his deleted Truth Social post was intended to suggest he is Jesus – or in some sense divine – then Christians are entitled to consider him blasphemous.

如果我们将“亵渎”包括嘲弄宗教,那么特朗普嘲弄伊斯兰教的行为几乎毫无疑问地构成了亵渎。如果我们相信他删除的Truth Social帖子意在暗示他是耶稣——或者在某种意义上是神——那么基督徒有权认为他亵渎神明。

That said, from a secular perspective, it is more self-indulgent foolishness than hate speech – but nonetheless, extremely inappropriate for a US president.

话虽如此,从世俗角度来看,这更像是自我放纵的愚蠢,而非仇恨言论——但无论如何,这对一位美国总统来说都是极其不合适的。

Philip C. Almond does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Philip C. Almond不为任何从本文中受益的公司或组织工作、提供咨询、拥有股份或接受资金,并且除了其学术任命之外,没有披露任何相关的隶属关系。