I would like to evoke here a text of Borges who struck me much.

 This text entitled "Three versions of Judas" presents through the work of a completely fictitious  German theologist, Runeberg, three assumptions on the true nature of the apostle informer. In the first, Judas seems the reversed reflection of Jesus:. Judas delivers Jesus in all full knowledge of the facts. he knows that his treachery is essential to the future advent of Christianity. He is the executor of the divine Will.  In a second version, Runeberg pushes the comparison until making to Judas a saint: “Judas sought the Hell, because the happiness of the Lord was enough for him. He thought that the happiness, like the good, is a divine attribute and that the men should not usurp it”.  it is by asceticism that Judas wanted to be degraded,  to be charged the lowest crimes: denouncement, bretrayal.
 In the third, Runeberg supports that God to save us became man completely, “but man to the point of iniquity”, and was incarnated not in Jesus but in Judas."God  became fully man up infamy, man until reprobation and the abyss (...); He could have been Alexander or Pythagoras or Rurik or Jesus; He chooses a negligible destiny: He was Judas"
Terrified of having discovered this heretical secret, the fictitious author dies of an aneurysmal rupture, hoping that the grace will be granted to him to share the Hell with the Redeemer.
Borges was a writer of an immense scholarship,which often allowed him  to give appearances of the truth to completely imaginary characters or works. the novel  is written in form of a scholarly article filled with precise details, bibliographical references.
One leaves this reading convinced that" this monstruous conclusion" could be reality. Although being atheistic (or agnostic), I was very impressed by the philosophical range of this text which calls into question, shakes the foundations of Cristianism:  the greatest villain in History, Judas Iscariot, is in fact the only disciple who understood Jesus!  I imagine the shock that it must be for a Believer to consider this possibility…
It seems to me that this text can lead, initiate an interesting discussion on the concept of blasphemy.

What is a blasphemy?
It is blasphemy a positive or negative attitude?
Until where can one go?
For my part, I consider that the blasphemy is a good way to open the mind, to question established values, generally accepted ideas, to oxygenate the brain somehow…
Therefore, let us blaspheme a little.

Some quotes:
 “A fault confessed is half forgiven, said Pie XII to Himmler.” Pierre Desproges
"The Ascension: any Jesus immersed in prayer receives a push upwards which returns him with his dad. This is the theorem of the elevator." Pierre Desproges
 "The animals are less intolerant than us: a hungry pig will eat Muslim." Pierre Desproges
 "Any Christian from receiving the Eucharist will tell you, God melts in your mouth not in your hand. "Pierre Desproges
"God died, Marx died, and myself I do not feel very well…" Woody Allen


The PRAYER - Man Ray (1930)
(I am ready to be converted ... it is a joke, I hope that I do not offend anybody)




Marcel Duchamp. L.H.O.O.Q. (Mona Lisa with the moustache), 1919








Luis Buñuel, Viridiana scene, a film which caused a scandal, but won the Palme d'Or at Cannes in 1961. The Vatican described the film as impious and blasphemous.





Bettina Rheims: