We will need to agree to disagree!

I find nativity scenes to be offensive because they violate the Second Commandment. They are a graven image of God. You can disagree all you want, but that won’t stop you from being dead wrong.

I find it amusing that so-called “Christians” fight to display nativity scenes, and end up condemning themselves as lawbreakers by participating in such idolatrous displays. They are nothing but a trashy display of sub-Christian American folk religion. You can have your folk religion; I’ll take Christ.

I don’t agree with you - I am sure you don’t find many things offensive relating to Christianity -

I’m not partial to Huckabee for President, so you are wrong again -

The Nativity scene is not sacred. It is a sub-Christian cultural relic that doesn’t even comport with any one of the Incarnation narratives of the synoptic gospels. Moreover, the Second Commandment forbids making graven images of God, such as depicting the Christ-child in a nativity scene.

The cartoonist used a cultural relic that is dear to many pseudo-Christian civil religionists to poke fun of a Presidential candidate whose entire campaign is based on pandering to the prejudices and idiosyncracies of these pseudo-Christian civil religionists. There’s nothing offensive about the cartoon at all.

I suspect that you’re partial to “The Huckster” and don’t like seeing him ridiculed. Your feigned outrage is getting a bit annoying, though.

YOU WRITE:

……..“God is not hurt or damaged by this cartoon…He’s sort of above this kind of thing. Political cartoonists do this sort of thing all of the time.
This time, you took offense. We’ve heard.
Now, kindly, calm down, PLEASE. You’re beginning to embarrass yourself, and us.”

Kennethos, you now SPEAK FOR GOD, you know that God is not hurt, you presume to know how God feels? Political cartoonists do all sorts of things, they aren’t a Christian blog -

I haven’t embarrassed myself at all, but you certainly have taken the liberty to ’speak for God’ which should embarrass YOU!

You’ve made many wise and valuable remarks and comments on this blog in the past, which is likely why many listen to you.
On this topic, however, you’re branching into hysteria. The looks in the editorial cartoon character’s eyes says it all: this is not what they were expecting at the manger! It’s a valid point to make. It took me second to understand it. It doesn’t offend me, since it’s not saying a thing about Jesus….Mike Huckabee isn’t Jesus, and vice versa. God is not hurt or damaged by this cartoon…He’s sort of above this kind of thing. Political cartoonists do this sort of thing all of the time.
This time, you took offense. We’ve heard.
Now, kindly, calm down, PLEASE. You’re beginning to embarrass yourself, and us.

MISSION STATEMENT

“To report, interpret, and illustrate the news in a timely, accurate, enjoyable, and arresting fashion from a perspective committed to the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.”

A ‘Nativity’ scene with a presidential candidate squeezed into the manger isn’t a Biblical perspective, but one of ridicule regarding the birth of our LORD Jesus Christ -

There are many ways in which to typify ones dislike of a presidential candidate, without using being sac-religious - We as Believers don’t need to use the the Global World’s point to make our beliefs known, and we certainly don’t need to copy their MO -

Apparently there are some who visit this blog who think that the cartoon was worthy of debate.

I admire your zeal, but not every battle is worth fighting. You can have the last word.

We ALL know that the cartoon was originally posted in a non-Christian publication, that is not the POINT! The ‘point’ is, there was no reason to give it attention here - unless of course negative attention, is better than no attention at all -

World Magazine rarely addresses the comments made here, so whats ‘news’ about that?

The purpose of posting the cartoon was not to condone it but to elicit response and reaction, of which you have done both.

I don’t have to stick up for WORLD as they obviously don’t see a need to do it themselves by not addressing your comments.

You are offended. You’ve made your case. Pauline and I and others see it differently. We are not offended and it doesn’t lessen our love for the Savior because we are not offended by a tacky cartoon.