How does Betty Crocker compare to Jesus?

Betty was more into bestowing her followers with miraculous baking powers, whereas Jesus was quite good with making a little go a long way with fish and bread. He was also a genius at passing off inferior wine. As far as I can tell his promises to bestow his followers with the miraculous powers of healing, snake-handling and swallowing poisoning were a bust, but really…aside from healing those skills really aren’t as valuable as baking so it isn’t any great loss.

Jesus fed thousands with a few loaves of bread.

Betty Crocker sold millions of cookbooks.

So I guess Betty Crocker is Randian Jesus.

No comparison…Betty has killer recipes for decadent chocolate cake!! WOOF!

Wouldn’t that be Devils Food Cake?

Betty Crocker and Jesus have a lot in common. Both are popular cultural icons. Both had devote followers. However, in the case of Betty Crocker, General Mills later informed the public that she was not real. She had been completely made up to sell more biscuit and pancake mix. After all, there is a lot of dough in pancake mix and General Mills needed a spokesperson to reach out to their followers so they would identify with their product. So, you see Betty and Jesus have a lot in common.

General Mills created Betty in their own image
god created Jesus in his/her own image. Actually, it was man who created god in their own image

Betty – encouraged followers to save and redeem coupons
Jesus – saved and redeemed his followers (aka ‘sinners’)

Betty – mixed water into biscuits
Jesus – turned water into wine

Betty – baked a “mystery fruit cake” on national television
Jesus – mysterious, half-baked fruit cake

Betty – (aka General MIlls) was in it for the dough
Jesus – Churches in it for the dough

General Mills—accepts cash
God (the church)—accepts cash

Betty’s creations – heavenly
Jesus’ créations – devine

Betty Crocker’s Catalog—lists its inventory of merchandise
Jesus’ Lambs Book of Life – lists un-repented sinners

Betty – served up soulful meals
Jesus – served up soulful sermons

General Mills created the bible of cookbooks – the Betty Crocker cookbook to sell recipes.
Man created to the bible to sell religion

Ahhh… I see. At first I thought this was a lovely Q based in intelligence. Silly me, not being able to detect flame bait when I see it.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies All in the eye of the beholden!!

@wolfram You. Are. A. Genius! I laughed my head off.

Betty performed magic in the kitchen
Jesus performed magic where ever he could find an audience

The comparison is obviously biased. If Jesus had had an electric range and an electric mixer, his contribution might have been as delicious as Betty’s.

“Jesus – mysterious, half-baked fruit cake”
Considering this phrase, I think you are biased and just looking for a fight. Jesus was a brilliant man, and he managed to inject a measure of civility into his followers (albeit short lived, and not on the level we enjoy today). He was a human, but he was one of the most remarkable humans who ever lived. His philosophies surpassed those of Aristotle on some points. To call him a half-baked fruit cake is naive, ignorant and ridiculous.

@FireMadeFlesh I disagree. I think he’s trying to be funny, and it worked for me. Why is that the only thing you took from the long answer? If you think he was looking for a fight, maybe you were too. Lighten up maybe?

@janedelila I did find the rest of it amusing, but that line spoiled it for me. It was the only thing I referred to because it was the only part I had a problem with. Misrepresentations are not funny. Would you find it funny if someone called Stephen Hawkings stupid, or Christiano Ronaldo uncoordinated?

@FireMadeFlesh I would consider it in context. And a mere opinion. I see you have been offended, and I respect that too.

Both are overrated. Cook’s Illustrated is superior to both.

Ok, so Jesus may have been a moral philosopher but there are stories about Jesus of Nazareth that questions his sanity. The whole idea of the Betty Crocker comparison was to take a new perspective (hopefully a humorous one) on a subject that many consider sacred or off limits. Jesus, if he actually existed, was obviously gifted and made a positive impact on his followers for men to write about him many years after his death.
Jesus was intimately familiar with the Hebrew scriptures and probably better at reciting and arguing them than the Scribes and Pharisees. It was that ability that infuriated the Jews. Plus the fact that he went mad and ruined their money changing business. The Jews already thought he was a lunatic but now they had proof. Its one thing to drive demons into a pig but get between a money changer and his money and you have a fight on your hands.
Even his family thought Jesus was as nutty as a fruit cake. Mark 3:21 says ‘When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, He is out of his mind.’
He further displays unstable behavior in cursing a fig tree for not having fruit on it. Mark 11:13–14 says, “13. And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. 14. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter forever.” Can any reasonable person deny that this behavior is a little crazy? Why would the Lord of heaven and earth expect to find fruit on a fig tree out of season?

@wolfram
“The whole idea of the Betty Crocker comparison was to take a new perspective (hopefully a humorous one) on a subject that many consider sacred or off limits. Jesus,” So, somehow, by being irreverant about something or someone whom others respect, you think that you will be amusing some people of like mind? Do you think that there will be any benefits derived by mocking something sacred to others?

On your handling of this question. a quote by Lewis Carrell comes to my mind…
“While the laughter of joy is in full harmony with our deeper life, the laughter of amusement should be kept apart from it. The danger is too great of thus learning to look at solemn things in a spirit of mockery, and to seek in them opportunities for exercising wit.”

As to your recent post, I wonder how many people have been thought to be crazy because their detractors were not able to understand what they did?

There are explanations for this behavior, which never perplexed me. It seemed pretty obvious, but I won’t mock you for lacking the ability to understand.

Everything He did was for the purpose of instruction or to cause the events to unfold as they had been ordained. There were a couple of reasons for the episode at the temple. He did want to make a statement as to the lack of respect being shown to the sacred place, but the method was designed to enrage those who would later be key players in his trial and crucifiction. He was not acting precipitously, as he stopped to prepare the whip. His family’s lack of understanding of his purposes is not surprising. I’m sure each of us have experienced this.

The fig tree was an object lesson, it represented the leadership of the Jewish community and the fact that they would fail to be “fruitful”. They appeared righteous, but theirs was a hypocritical and empty righteousness. Consequently, Jesus cursed this tree of hypocrisy that symbolized the condition of the leaders of Jesus’ day.

“Mockery is often the result of a poverty of wit.” ~ Jean de la Bruyere

@wolfram I agree that holding religion as untouchable is wrong and unproductive, but I think there are parts of Christianity far more ridiculous that Jesus, and that he should serve as a symbol of the good religion can do in rare instances. I appreciate your effort to lighten the discussion, but I just don’t think it was the right way to go about it. Thanks anyway.

Oh my @FireMadeFlesh I feel I must repeat…lighten up! If you accuse the OP of trying to start a fight….why are you preaching fighting? @wolfram starting to adore you

If the big JJ could handle being nailed to the cross, I’m sure he can deal with his relationship to BC.

Regardless, though the comparison surely would not bother him, the intentions of the OP were/are suspiciously sinister.