Vatican Wraps Baby Jesus in Palestinian Keffihey in Official Vatican Manger

Did Jesus Wear a Kippah Scull Cap ? ?
Interesting that,
NO Christ Jesus did NOT wear a scull-cap

The custom of wearing a scull-cap arose in Babylonia,
among the NON-Jewish residents.
Scull-caps were a european thing NOT an Israelite custom.
btw Christians know that1 Cor. 11:4-7
"Every man who prays
or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head"
. . . Soooo who really are the scull-cap wearers praying at the wall ? ?
www.jerusalemperspective.com...#:~:text=It%20is%20certain%20that%20Jesus,wear%20a%20kippah%20(skullcap).

______________________

BEFORE YOU POST.
READ THIS....

Important if Actively Posting

Be the Change you Wish to see... Redux






Community Announcement re: Decorum




These rules apply to all threads and if you want to engage in personal attacks there are other sites on the Internet where you can do that. Our goal is for ATS to be above that. For members here to post like mature adults.


To repeat, those who refuse to "get it" WILL face LENGTHY POSTING BANS!!
YOU are responsible for your own posts





And, as always...
Do not reply to this post.

a reply to: FlyersFan

That thing the baby Jesus in the manger is laying on is a massive POLITICAL STATEMENT.

Let us compare, for just a moment, what Pope Francis said about the Christmas tree and the Palestinian decorations.

The majestic solemnity of the tree is striking. Cut down with respect for the ecological principles of the natural replacement of the forest, it bears the signs of many years, the numerous stratifications of the solid trunk, the old giving life to the young, the young who envelop and protect the old, all rising together upwards.
GREETING OF THE HOLY FATHER TO DONORS OF THE NATIVITY SCENE AND THE CHRISTMAS TREE IN ST. PETER'S SQUARE

The old and the new:
The Jesus story of being born in Bethlehem, Roman Judea. Old.
The Bethlehem born artists created figures of holy family from Palestinian olive wood. New.

Old Bethlehem is still there. The jurisdictions have altered. From Roman Judea to Palestinian State. The Keffiyeh pattern is from the 1930s, before the State of Israel. It was Palestine, named such by the British as spoils of war against the Ottomans. Let it not be said that there was never a Palestine. The British may take offense. The former Levantine Ottomans became Palestinians thereby.

I see no reason for the Palestinian olive carving of baby Jesus not to be protected by a Palestinian Keffiyeh from the ravages of rough hay in that manger.

It's art!
An expression of values!
"Enough with wars".

That question raises an interesting conundrum for Catholics who feel like FlyersFan does about the current pope, since the Catholic Church also claims that all popes are infallible, so that claim would apply to everything the current pope says or does as well. FlyersFan is certainly not viewing the current pope as such as demonstrated in the OP.

a reply to: whereislogic

Infallibility is not the absence of sin.
You must know this, are you are being disingenuous?

originally posted by: Plugit
...

So when you make life impossible, you get something like 7 October, Israel just fills their hearts with hate. ...

Did you notice that the IDF did nothing when the terrorists were crossing the border (the most watched border in the world, the most heavily secured border in the world, they even have video of the terrorists crossing the border, who shot those videos? Who was watching the security cameras? If no one was watching, why not? We're not even talking about those who crossed by means of tunnels or paragliders, I remember a video with terrorists on motorbikes crossing the border)? Then, as Israeli citizens were attacked and begging for help, the IDF still did nothing (we're talking many hours here). Only after the terrorists were completely done and gone, did they move in, with cameras of course to record the aftermath of the atrocities and show those videos to the Israeli public to get them all riled up for and supportive of the coming round of war profiteering.

As if they wanted it to happen so that US arms manufacturers can make more profits supplying military equipment. These types (which of course can also be found in Israel, but most are US based, although they may live on some luxurious tropical island):

Austrian economist Schumpeter wrote: “The orientation toward war is mainly fostered by the domestic interests of ruling classes but also by the influence of all those who stand to gain individually from a war policy, whether economically or socially.” These ruling classes have been defined as “elites [that] are at all times involved in trying to manipulate other elements of the population, or the public mood itself, so as to perpetuate themselves in power.”​—Why War? by Professors Nelson and Olin.

Every nation has its ruling class, even though that group may be divided into different political factions. However, many observe that the power of the military elite in every nation should not be underestimated. Former U.S. Ambassador John K. Galbraith describes the military establishment as “by far the most powerful of the autonomous processes of government.”

And guess who profits from supplying Hamas with rockets? When 2 supposedly opposing sides, or better said, elite groups, act in their mutual interest (war profits, increased military expenditures and budgets), are they really on opposing sides? What incentive do they have for providing real peace and security for the masses whose taxmoney they get more of when they fail to do so and wage war instead (whether those are direct wars or proxywars waged by supplying military equipment to another country, or whether that is the general global war on terror or wars between nations or a so-called 'Cold War' that is actually not that cold, but flares up again and again for another round of war profiteering on and from both sides of a conflict)?

'Divide and conquer' remains the name of the game for team Satan:

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I wasn't thinking about sin when I brought up the subject of papal infallibility. I viewed that term in light of the general or broadest definition for infallibility, which in the majority of dictionaries probably doesn't mention sin. In doing that I accidentally overlooked what Roman Catholics are exactly talking about when they use the concept of "papal infallibility" (concerning the point FlyersFan made: "The 'Infallibility' only applies to declarations on the faith that are proclaimed 'ex cathedra' ... 'From the Chair of Peter'.")

If I had looked up the definition (via google) I would have noticed it:

(in the Roman Catholic Church) the doctrine that in specified circumstances the Pope is incapable of error in pronouncing dogma.

Of course, what's described in the OP doesn't count as 'pronouncing dogma' ex cathedra. So I would have to change the point I was trying to make (cause I was wrong, the way I put it before).

I wasn't thinking about sin when I brought up the subject of papal infallibility. I viewed that term in light of the general or broadest definition for infallibility

a reply to: whereislogic
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
I would say respectfully, the subject of papal infallibility is more complicated than looking up the general or broadest definition of infalibility. If we discuss or exchange ideas and thoughts in a kinder manner we will all walk away with a greater understanding. I am a Roman Catholic but not an expert on theology but have noticed there has been a lot of concern about Pope Francis...

Archbishop Viganò defies Vatican summons, denounces Pope Francis

“I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void,” Viganò wrote. 

something seems wrong here

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe

Archbishop Viganò defies Vatican summons, denounces Pope Francis

I LOVE Archbishop Vigano. He is a hero.