God, a hard act to follow!

[@Li3n]

Blasphemy... Joseph should be older then that.

An unholy row has broken out in New Zealand over a church billboard aimed at "challenging stereotypes" about the birth of Jesus Christ.

A dejected-looking Joseph lies in bed next to Mary under the caption, "Poor Joseph. God was a hard act to follow".
St Matthew-in-the-City Church in Auckland, which erected the billboard, said it had intended to provoke debate.
But the Catholic Church, among others, has condemned it as "inappropriate" and "disrespectful".
Within hours of its unveiling, the billboard had been defaced with brown paint.
The church's vicar, Archdeacon Glynn Cardy, said the aim of the billboard had been to lampoon the literal interpretation of the Christmas conception story.

The billboard was defaced within hours of its unveiling

"What we're trying to do is to get people to think more about what Christmas is all about," he told the New Zealand Press Association (NZPA).
"Is it about a spiritual male God sending down sperm so a child would be born, or is it about the power of love in our midst as seen in Jesus?"
He told NZPA that the church had received e-mails and phone calls about the controversial image.
"About 50% said they loved it, and about 50% said it was terribly offensive," he said. "But that's out of about 20 responses - this is New Zealand."
But Lyndsay Freer, spokeswoman for the Catholic Diocese of Auckland, said the poster was offensive to Christians.
"Our Christian tradition of 2,000 years is that Mary remains a virgin and that Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph," she told the New Zealand Herald. "Such a poster is inappropriate and disrespectful."
The family values group Family First said any debate about the Virgin birth should be held inside the church.
"To confront children and families with the concept as a street billboard is completely irresponsible and unnecessary," Family First director Bob McCroskrie told the news website stuff.co.nz.

 

[North_Ranger]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

 

[JCM]

Blasphemy... Joseph should be older then that.

An unholy row has broken out in New Zealand over a church billboard aimed at "challenging stereotypes" about the birth of Jesus Christ.

A dejected-looking Joseph lies in bed next to Mary under the caption, "Poor Joseph. God was a hard act to follow".
St Matthew-in-the-City Church in Auckland, which erected the billboard, said it had intended to provoke debate.
But the Catholic Church, among others, has condemned it as "inappropriate" and "disrespectful".
Within hours of its unveiling, the billboard had been defaced with brown paint.
The church's vicar, Archdeacon Glynn Cardy, said the aim of the billboard had been to lampoon the literal interpretation of the Christmas conception story.

The billboard was defaced within hours of its unveiling

"What we're trying to do is to get people to think more about what Christmas is all about," he told the New Zealand Press Association (NZPA).
"Is it about a spiritual male God sending down sperm so a child would be born, or is it about the power of love in our midst as seen in Jesus?"
He told NZPA that the church had received e-mails and phone calls about the controversial image.
"About 50% said they loved it, and about 50% said it was terribly offensive," he said. "But that's out of about 20 responses - this is New Zealand."
But Lyndsay Freer, spokeswoman for the Catholic Diocese of Auckland, said the poster was offensive to Christians.
"Our Christian tradition of 2,000 years is that Mary remains a virgin and that Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph," she told the New Zealand Herald. "Such a poster is inappropriate and disrespectful."
The family values group Family First said any debate about the Virgin birth should be held inside the church.
"To confront children and families with the concept as a street billboard is completely irresponsible and unnecessary," Family First director Bob McCroskrie told the news website stuff.co.nz.

Religious outrage is always funny.

However, to be fair, if it ware a Muslim mosque poking fun of Muhammed's mother, there'd be a fatwa and maybe, deaths, so one has to be thankful that at least the Christian world has almost caught up to the modern world.

 

[Silver Jelly]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

Dogma is one of the best films about religion I've ever seen.

 

[Wasabi Poptart]

 

[Chibibar]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

Dogma is one of the best films about religion I've ever seen.[/QUOTE]

I love that movie

 

[Chazwozel]

Blasphemy... Joseph should be older then that.

An unholy row has broken out in New Zealand over a church billboard aimed at "challenging stereotypes" about the birth of Jesus Christ.

A dejected-looking Joseph lies in bed next to Mary under the caption, "Poor Joseph. God was a hard act to follow".
St Matthew-in-the-City Church in Auckland, which erected the billboard, said it had intended to provoke debate.
But the Catholic Church, among others, has condemned it as "inappropriate" and "disrespectful".
Within hours of its unveiling, the billboard had been defaced with brown paint.
The church's vicar, Archdeacon Glynn Cardy, said the aim of the billboard had been to lampoon the literal interpretation of the Christmas conception story.

The billboard was defaced within hours of its unveiling

"What we're trying to do is to get people to think more about what Christmas is all about," he told the New Zealand Press Association (NZPA).
"Is it about a spiritual male God sending down sperm so a child would be born, or is it about the power of love in our midst as seen in Jesus?"
He told NZPA that the church had received e-mails and phone calls about the controversial image.
"About 50% said they loved it, and about 50% said it was terribly offensive," he said. "But that's out of about 20 responses - this is New Zealand."
But Lyndsay Freer, spokeswoman for the Catholic Diocese of Auckland, said the poster was offensive to Christians.
"Our Christian tradition of 2,000 years is that Mary remains a virgin and that Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph," she told the New Zealand Herald. "Such a poster is inappropriate and disrespectful."
The family values group Family First said any debate about the Virgin birth should be held inside the church.
"To confront children and families with the concept as a street billboard is completely irresponsible and unnecessary," Family First director Bob McCroskrie told the news website stuff.co.nz.

Kinda lame.

 

[SeraRelm]

Thank you Wildsoul, that got a laugh out of me.

 

[SpecialKO]

Think the image is funny, but the explanation for it is pretty weak. I'm not sure what stereotypes are supposedly being challenged.

That looks more like a shock-jockish attempt to get people to come to church, which I do think is a little inappropriate for a billboard.

 

[Chibibar]

Kinda fail.

"Challenging stereotypes" my ass, they still look pasty white ass to me.

The phrase itself is kinda funny, but a semi-permanent billboard? Not so much.

Also, just to rectify, Jesus was not the only child of Mary.

wait?? they are not white?!?!!?!

(sarcasm off)

 

[Bowielee]

That was one of the things that always floored me about images of Mary and Jesus in America. They're always portrayed as Caucasian when there's so obviously no way they could have been.

 

[Hailey Knight]

I think the movie Nativity Story actually showed them as more Mediterranean-looking.

 

[Philosopher B.]

I'm more offended by the defaced poster. Looks like someone let something come spatterin' out their ass-cavity, yo.

 

[@Li3n]

Also, just to rectify, Jesus was not the only child of Mary.

Actually because some people that are clearly identified as His cousins are also called Jesus's brothers (as i recall) we don't really know that.

I think the movie Nativity Story actually showed them as more Mediterranean-looking.

Now Mediterraneans aren't white anymore?! Remind me never to get a tan.


Also, why are Jews not considered white, they certainly don't qualify as black, brown or yellow.

 

[JONJONAUG]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

Dogma is one of the best films about religion I've ever seen.[/QUOTE]

Way to pick the worst scene from it though. In a movie that lampoons religious dogma it makes it come off as stupid when it jokes about Mary remaining a virgin when it is explicitly stated in the Bible that Jesus had younger brothers and sisters.

 

[@Li3n]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desposyni#Degree_of_consanguinuity_between_the_Adelphoi_and_Jesus

 

[North_Ranger]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

Dogma is one of the best films about religion I've ever seen.[/QUOTE]

Way to pick the worst scene from it though. In a movie that lampoons religious dogma it makes it come off as stupid when it jokes about Mary remaining a virgin when it is explicitly stated in the Bible that Jesus had younger brothers and sisters.[/QUOTE]

Umm... It was picked because it was relevant to the conversation in question, maybe?

 

[Silver Jelly]

Bah, someone has their cilice on way too tight.

Also, heareth ye wordes of Rufus, the Thirteenth Apostle:

Bethany: Jesus didn't have any brothers or sisters. Mary was a virgin.
Rufus: Mary gave birth to CHRIST without having known a man's touch, that's true. But she did have a husband. And do you really think he'd have stayed married to her all those years if he wasn't getting laid? The nature of God and the Virgin Mary, those are leaps of faith. But to believe a married couple never got down? Well, that's just plain gullibility.

Dogma is one of the best films about religion I've ever seen.[/QUOTE]

Way to pick the worst scene from it though. In a movie that lampoons religious dogma it makes it come off as stupid when it jokes about Mary remaining a virgin when it is explicitly stated in the Bible that Jesus had younger brothers and sisters.[/QUOTE]

Umm... It was picked because it was relevant to the conversation in question, maybe?[/QUOTE]

Also, most people could care less about what is said in the bible: (at least in catholicism), Mary was a virgin PERIOD.

 

[@Li3n]

That's probably because there's no actual mention of YOUNGER brethren... just of brethren in general.

 

[Silver Jelly]

If I have to believe my priest, wich I do, the original greek word that was transated as "virgin" was one that meant "girl" as in a girl that can't be pregnant yet. It gives a new symbolism to the two sisters that get pregnant when they can't (one because she's too young and the other one because she's too old) and... It's a much more interesting miracle.

 

[@Li3n]

Fun fact: any greek word was not actually the original.


And what sisters are you talking about?!

 

[Silver Jelly]

Fun fact: any greek word was not actually the original.

Ok, ok. The text from wich the version we use of the bible was originally translated.

And what sisters are you talking about?!

John the baptist was Jesus' cousin, and Elisabeth was Mary's older COUSIN.

(looking on wikipedia, I can't find this particular fact... But it's one of those things I know for sure because I have heard them again and again at mess... It's told, for example, in that part in wich Mary visits Elisabeth and "the child in her womb jumps (or something similar) at the arrival of Mary pregnant with Jesus".)

Edited: D'oh. Cousin, not sister!

 

[sixpackshaker]

Fun fact: any greek word was not actually the original.


And what sisters are you talking about?!

Fun Fact, the locals of the time spoke and wrote in Greek.

 

[North_Ranger]

And Aramaic.

I wonder how many people knew that before that Gibson gorefest gonzo movie?

 

[sixpackshaker]

Fun fact: any greek word was not actually the original.

Ok, ok. The text from wich the version we use of the bible was originally translated.

[/QUOTE]

The gospels and the letters of Paul were mostly written in Greek. There is some Aramaic. Palestine was a very cosmopolitan region, the crossroads of Egypt-Africa, Arabia, Asia Minor, The Silk Road (China), Greece, and Rome. This was the peak of Hellenistic culture, 300 years after Alexander. The locals were heavily influenced by the Greek Language. Most likely Jesus would have spoken to crowds using Greek, it was the Lingua Franca of the time.

---------- Post added at 03:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:49 PM ----------

And Aramaic.

I wonder how many people knew that before that Gibson gorefest gonzo movie?

I never saw the movie, did Jesus ever speak Greek in it? He should have.

 

[North_Ranger]

Actually, it is my understanding that Aramaic was the local language spoken by the Jews and other neighbouring peoples at the time. Greek was the lingua franca of the eastern part of the Roman Empire, though.

As for the film... tried to watch it, but couldn't past a certain point where I could imagine Gibson just creamin' his pants with the whole violence fetish thing. But if memory serves, Jesus is shown speaking Aramaic with Jews. And Latin with the Romans (apparently a conscious choice so people could better hear the language difference or something, cue eye-roll...).

 

[Silver Jelly]

Well, I don't know much about this language thing! I'm quoting something a priest told me years ago! And, really, I couldn't care less about what language it was. What I'm talking about are the meanings of teh words, not the words themselves. I care about this "mistranslation" that became so important for christianity.

 

[Dave]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

 

[Chibibar]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

That never happen

The bible is never altered by anyone. It is perfect since it was made by God

 

[Covar]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Or Catholic, and actually know it was your religion who had a hand in it's creation.

 

[Iaculus]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Last I checked, it was just the Koran that was seen by its adherents as the absolute Word of God.

Apart from a few quotes from the Big G, it's pretty commonly accepted that the Bible was written by humans, for humans.

 

[Covar]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Last I checked, it was just the Koran that was seen by its adherents as the absolute Word of God.

Apart from a few quotes from the Big G, it's pretty commonly accepted that the Bible was written by humans, for humans.[/QUOTE]
not by quite a few Protestant denominations sadly. Then again some of the same people who told me the Bible was infallible because it was written by and given to us by God also told me that wine back in the biblical times was actually grape juice and that Catholics are not Christians.

 

[sixpackshaker]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Last I checked, it was just the Koran that was seen by its adherents as the absolute Word of God.

Apart from a few quotes from the Big G, it's pretty commonly accepted that the Bible was written by humans, for humans.[/QUOTE]
not by quite a few Protestant denominations sadly. Then again some of the same people who told me the Bible was infallible because it was written by and given to us by God also told me that wine back in the biblical times was actually grape juice and that Catholics are not Christians.[/QUOTE]

I was at a Christian conference while in high school. We were doing a bible reading, the one I was reading from was a newer translation with more modern words. And after a few questions I told them it was a new Catholic Bible.

Then a kid made that similar statement, "I did not know Catholics were Christian.."

I had to tell him, "Well, who do you think wrote it in the first place?"

 

[@Li3n]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Or Catholic, and actually know it was your religion who had a hand in it's creation.[/QUOTE]

Keep telling yourself that... i mean really, papal infallibility...

The gospels and the letters of Paul were mostly written in Greek.

You mean the guy who called himself the "Apostle to the Gentiles"?! Now why would he do that?

As i recall the earliest books found/known about were indeed in greek, but they're like from the 3rd century, and it's not unlikely that some hebrew text existed before that (look at the Septuagint).

 

[JCM]

It's impossible to misunderstand the Word of God. As the Bible was written by Him and not man it doesn't matter what we think because the text is perfect.

Unless you are Conservative and want to rewrite the Bible and take out all that liberal bias.

Technically, part of it was written by man, but dictated by God, and the other parts were 4 guys writing about him.

Imagine Stephen King dictating stories to some of his fans, and then 4 followers of his writing about his life and what he says.