From the Worldnetdaily, proof that a picture really is worth 1000 words:
What a relief to find out that the bread and wine at communion are kosher.
I don’t care what Wordnut daily says.
I’m still not eating Soylent Green.
And, as the picture shows, Jesus is still Danish.
There are two places in the New Testament where it is stated that it is no longer necessary to keep kosher.
As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food
is unclean in itself. – Romans 14:14
Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of
conscience, for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.” If
some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat
whatever is put before you without raising questions of
conscience. – I Cor. 10:25-27
I’ve been saying Norwegian all along & I’m sticking with it.
And that ought to be good enough for a Paulist. The guy he based Christianity on would doubtless have another, more Pharisaic take on the matter.
This is news? Everyone already knew that Jesus was a white guy!
Not to be confused with Big Butter Jesus, which is something else entirely.
Are they sure that isn’t Jesus the Viking?
Can anyone explain to me how a Middle-Eastern Jew got a Hispanic first name?
Not only that, he used SPF 40 sunscreen!
Ed, your prayers are once again answered:
US Sen. Vitter to run for Louisiana governor
@robnyny #3 – Most people who push the “Jewish Jesus” reject the epistles and instead hold only to the Gospels, typically just Matthew.
@Randomfactor #5 – “The guy he based Christianity on would doubtless have another, more Pharisaic take on the matter.”
Very likely, yes. The Pharisees were a political party, with a membership and constituency that drew from several of the reform minded groups such as the Zealots and Essenes. From what we know of Pharisaic beliefs and practices — the importance of intent over literalist adherence to the Law, an emphasis on moral purity over ritual purity, and the use of parables to teach — it is very likely that Jesus was part of that same general movement.
Is it just me or does Kosher Jesus have a somewhat disturbing stare? He looks like he’s contemplating exactly where in the lake of fire to throw you.
Technically, the name is the Latin version of the Greek version of Yeshua, which, in English becomes Joshua. And still haven’t found anyone who can tell me why they don’t use his “real” name.
If Jesus (Sit nomen Domini benedictum) wasn’t white, does that mean Jews aren’t white?
Technically, the name is the Latin version of the Greek version of Yeshua, which, in English becomes Joshua.
I thought Yehoshua becomes Joshua and Yeshua becomes Jesus (via Latin & Greek) …?
Re Jonathangray @ #16
Arab Jews, of which Yeshua ben Yusef of Nazareth was probably one, look like other Arabs. Technically they are Caucasians but are grouped with brown people like Mexicans. Non-Europeans would be a better description.
It is widely believed that the portrayals of jesus during the rule of Alexander VI were based on his son, Cesare Borgia. I think we should encourage christians today to do likewise; perhaps jesus should be portrayed as looking like Justin Beiber or Timberlake.
Kosher Jesus, eh? Now all I’ve got decide is if I should fry, stew or roast him and what kind of vegetables would be suitable. @@
Arab Jews, of which Yeshua ben Yusef of Nazareth was probably one, look like other Arabs.
How could He have been an ‘Arab Jew’ when Iudaea wasn’t then part of the Arab world?
Jpn-Jon – ever heard of walking? Folks used to it a lot back in the olden days. Or ddija think that god made different kinds of people and put ’em in different places because he wanted to keep ’em separated? @@
Truly your idiocy knows no bounds.
Not to mention Peter’s vision:
In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. And there came a voice to him: “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.” (Acts 10:12-15)
Re Jonathan Grey @ #21
There were lots of Arabs living in Judea and Samaria then, just as today there are lots of Arabs living in present day Israel. Present day Israel also isn’t part of the Arab World (about the only thing that the Israelis and the Arabs agree on).
If the state of Israel is not part of the Arab world despite there being many Arabs there, it surely follows that one wouldn’t refer to Israelis as ‘Arab Jews’ since that expression is used to refer to Jews living in Arab lands.
Re jonathangray @ #24
The term Arab Jews refers to that fraction of the population of the State of Israel who are either immigrants from various Arab countries (e.g. Iraq) or are descended from such immigrants. There are also still a few Jews living in Arab countries such as Morocco and Egypt who are indistinguishable from their Muslim neighbors.
So — Jews in, or from, Arab lands. Why would you class Jesus as such?
Jon-Jon – because they are essentially identical in genetic terms and these genes exhibit in an essentially identical manner (which is the only meaningful measurement here).* Hence you’re attempting to draw a distinction that is without a difference.
Awww – don’t kids say the darnest things?
* In fact, humans are one of the least genetically variable, sexually reproducing animals on the planet.