Comments

  1. robnyny says

    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

  2. Randomfactor says

    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.

  3. Nick Gotts says

    And, as the picture shows, Jesus is still Danish.

    Not only that, he used SPF 40 sunscreen!

  4. says

    @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.

  5. matty1 says

    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.

  6. KDinUT says

    @Al Dente

    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.

  7. jonathangray says

    If Jesus (Sit nomen Domini benedictum) wasn’t white, does that mean Jews aren’t white?

  8. jonathangray says

    KDinUT:

    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) …?

  9. colnago80 says

    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.

  10. says

    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.

  11. dingojack says

    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. @@
    Dingo

  12. jonathangray says

    colnago80:

    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?

  13. dingojack says

    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.
    Dingo

  14. says

    #3,

    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)

  15. colnago80 says

    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).

  16. jonathangray says

    colnago80:

    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.

  17. colnago80 says

    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.

  18. dingojack says

    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?
    Dingo
    ——–
    * In fact, humans are one of the least genetically variable, sexually reproducing animals on the planet.

Leave a Reply