Only a chocolate Jesus

Nervous Spy · Post by **Nervous Spy** » Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:19 am

Crazy Chris wrote:A chocolate Buddha would taste better.

Or how about a xocolatl Quetzalcoatl?

Soldier Volkov · Post by **Soldier Volkov** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:03 pm

It's late in the post but....
Considering the cultural climate in this day and age, there's no doubt in my mind that this guy knew he would or even counted on offending a whole lot of people with this stunt. Thing is he didn't care. In my book, that makes him a d-bag. (as others have said)

I am always disturbed when people don't realize how much deep emotion and reverence can be attached to a symbol. What disturbs me even more is that they don't give a wooden nickel.

Though....I do think that breaking into someone's basement over something like this would be kind of fanatical.

BrownEyedCat · Post by **BrownEyedCat** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:35 pm

Nervous Spy wrote:
Killbert-Robby wrote:New life aim : eat 100% pure chocolate.
That should be easy to accomplish, since any kind of chocolate is 100% chocolate to begin with. 100% cocoa, now that's something else ... but "100% cocoa chocolate" would be a contradiction in terms - it would be just cocoa, not chocolate. You should be able to emulate the sensory experience, however, by preparing Nesquik with tonic water.

I think this is a good reason to re-link the essay on Noka chocolates at the Dallas food blog. Noka pitched their chocolates as being 'purer' than most others. Which turns out to be a dirty, dirty lie.

Fantastic information about chocolate manufacture, though.

MixedMyth · Post by **MixedMyth** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:42 pm

Nervous Spy wrote:
Crazy Chris wrote:A chocolate Buddha would taste better.
Or how about a xocolatl Quetzalcoatl?

Brilliance, I say!

Americangothic · Post by **Americangothic** » Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:20 pm

Chocolate is for Wiccans.
http://www.cloudnet.com/~renfest/ritual.htm

SWISS MISS: Hear now the words of the Chocolate God, who was of old called Ghirardelli, Milton Snavely Hershey, Bosco, Fudgesicle, and by many other names.

HP: I am the strength of the candy rack, and the piece that fell on the
floor, but looks like it might not have gotten too dirty, and the deepest
bitterness of dark chocolate. No matter how you try to resist the call of
chocolate, I will hunt you out and I will become your sacred prey. I am the
warmth of hot cocoa in the dead of winter, and the call of the road that
leads you to that really expensive Godiva store downtown.

DJMayhem · Post by **DJMayhem** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:24 am

Nervous Spy wrote:
Crazy Chris wrote:A chocolate Buddha would taste better.
Or how about a xocolatl Quetzalcoatl?

i actually dropped out of my chair laughing with with this one- thanks for that one, spy.

TRI · Post by **TRI** » Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:37 pm

You know, I just tried some of that afore mentioned 90% cocoa chocolate.

Man that's intense. If I'd had more than a single square I'd worry about collapsing into some kind of chocolate black hole.

Yeahduff · Post by **Yeahduff** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:07 pm

Soldier Volkov wrote:It's late in the post but....
Considering the cultural climate in this day and age, there's no doubt in my mind that this guy knew he would or even counted on offending a whole lot of people with this stunt. Thing is he didn't care. In my book, that makes him a d-bag. (as others have said)

I am always disturbed when people don't realize how much deep emotion and reverence can be attached to a symbol. What disturbs me even more is that they don't give a wooden nickel.

What about his work offends you? Seems like people are only reacting because they think they should, not because they've actually been insulted.

TheSuburbanLetdown · Post by **TheSuburbanLetdown** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:15 pm

I think it's interesting. It makes me think about the commercialism of religious holidays and what they're really supposed to be about.

TRI · Post by **TRI** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:43 pm

I thought it was more interesting in how it shows how strongly people react when confronted by any depiction of their particular iconography when depicted in any way slightly outside the norm even when there's no obvious malice intended.

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:04 am

I, for one, believe in god who has a sence of humor and who wouldn't be upset about such thing. So if someone else believes in god who is grouchy and humourless and who'd get offended so easily - then should I be offended by that other guy's vision of god? Because, I mean, it's practically the oposite of what I believe in.

TheSuburbanLetdown · Post by **TheSuburbanLetdown** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:07 am

Old Testament God was pretty humorless. He sorta mellowed out when his son was born.

Nervous Spy · Post by **Nervous Spy** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:36 am

mcDuffies wrote:god who is grouchy

His very last part in a movie, actually:

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:40 pm

When I said god had a sence of humor, I didn't mean himor as in puns and double-entendres.

Linkara · Post by **Linkara** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:09 pm

Agreed on God having a sense of humor. I'd imagine an all-powerful, all-knowing entity loves a good laugh even if he/she/it knows all the jokes.

ShineDog · Post by **ShineDog** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:21 am

an all powerful all seeing god sees the funny side of

EVERYTHING.

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:40 pm

I liked the "Dogma" arguement about it. If he doesn't have a sence of humor, why'd he make sex the way ity is?