Catholics object to chocolate Jesus

I can see why they object to this. Think about it, its close to Easter and this sort of thing is inappropriate when we are getting close to remembering the day Jesus was nailed to the cross, burried in a cave for three days, and rose again.
 
I can see why they object to this. Think about it, its close to Easter and this sort of thing is inappropriate when we are getting close to remembering the day Jesus was nailed to the cross, burried in a cave for three days, and rose again.

You'd think that it would be appropriate, for the same exact reason. Why shouldn't a holiday based so heavily on Jesus celebrate him by eating him?
 
I can see why they object to this. Think about it, its close to Easter and this sort of thing is inappropriate when we are getting close to remembering the day Jesus was nailed to the cross, burried in a cave for three days, and rose again.

Easter = chocolate and Jesus. They objected to this but like I said earlier you can buy chocolate crucifixes for easter.

Allegedly rose again.
 
I can see why they object to this. Think about it, its close to Easter and this sort of thing is inappropriate when we are getting close to remembering the day Jesus was nailed to the cross, burried in a cave for three days, and rose again.

Would it have been better if the artist had given him a loincloth?
 
I don't see a problem with it. *shrugs*
 
I'd like to add this was a protest by the "Catholic League" who are far from representative of mainstream catholics.
 
You'd think that it would be appropriate, for the same exact reason. Why shouldn't a holiday based so heavily on Jesus celebrate him by eating him?
I am actualy appauled to see my lord and savior to be depicted in an immodest way

Easter = chocolate and Jesus. They objected to this but like I said earlier you can buy chocolate crucifixes for easter.
As I said, many are against it because he is portrayed in an immodest way. To me, the artwork is made in bad taste and presented in the wrong time.

Allegedly rose again.
Sorry, but he did rose and acceded into heaven. I guess you cast this off when you left the church :shake:. If you want to argue about it, take it to a different thread. I'm not in the mood to be arguing with someone who hates the Catholic Church and it's people with a passion.
 
I am actualy appauled to see my lord and savior to be depicted in an immodest way

As I said, many are against it because he is portrayed in an immodest way. To me, the artwork is made in bad taste and presented in the wrong time.
Again how is Jesus pres

Sorry, but he did rose and acceded into heaven. I guess you cast this off when you left the church :shake:. If you want to argue about it, take it to a different thread. I'm not in the mood to be arguing with someone who hates the Catholic Church and it's people with a passion.

1.The Human body is God's gift to Jesus and Humanity, You only THINK it's immodest because of your cultural background. Would God have a problem with seing His son or other people naked?

2.How is the artwork in bad taste?(no pun intended)

3. No arguments here
 
I am actualy appauled to see my lord and savior to be depicted in an immodest way
As I said, many are against it because he is portrayed in an immodest way. To me, the artwork is made in bad taste and presented in the wrong time.

Immodest? They made a chocolate statue of him! How's athat immodest? I don't see chocolate Joe Bloggs statues, or even chocolate Lucifer statues.
 
Sorry, but he did rose and acceded into heaven. I guess you cast this off when you left the church :shake:. If you want to argue about it, take it to a different thread. I'm not in the mood to be arguing with someone who hates the Catholic Church and it's people with a passion.

I don't hate the church or catholics but fairytales do not = fact. So stop stating as fact things that are impossible and made up. I didn't cast anything off when I left the church since I never believed it to begin with.


Back to the topic. Stifeling freedom of expession is way more offencive then nudity. Or naked chocolate Jesus. OMG pennis!!!
 
How big was "it" shown as.

Cause if they made it really small or really big that might be grounds for some complaints
 
I love Jesus as much as the next man (assuming that next man isn't Curt) but how is this any more 'immodest' than, say, the Sistine Chapel painting with God and Adam?

EDIT: Crosspost with Gilder, sorta.
 
Immodest? They made a chocolate statue of him! How's athat immodest? I don't see chocolate Joe Bloggs statues, or even chocolate Lucifer statues.
It its nude, its most certainly immodest.

So stop stating as fact things that are impossible and made up
Sorry, but I am not going to stop stating the facts that I hold dear to and believe in. I don't believe that they are impossible nor made up. I have as much right to state my beliefs and opinions just as you do. I am really tired of constantly arguing with you in recent months. Especially with your critical views against Catholicism and especially the core beliefs of Christianity. In short, I will not stop saying that his resurrection is fact. Now lets end this argument now, I'm sick of it.

Stifeling freedom of expession is way more offencive then nudity. Or naked chocolate Jesus. OMG pennis!!!
A naked Jesus is indeed offensive to most people. I myself am appalled to see a nude Jesus, someone whom I see as my lord and savor and hold dear too.
 
Back
Top Bottom