Can anyone explain the use of the Apple Logo on Mo’s computer? Did Mo get a kickback from Apple? Are Apple computers “Godly”? Are PC from the Satan? Please explain!
Note that the Christ Myth Theory thing is not a modern, recent idea.
The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence
by John E. Remsberg
Originally published: New York: The Truth Seeker Company, 1909.
In case you wonder, it’s a scholarly text, not a wild-eyed anti-Christianity propaganda piece.
It contrasts the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth, who may or may not have existed, with the miraculous figure of Jesus the Christ. It offers an exhausting analysis of literary sources contrasting the Bible’s and the Church’s claims with other, historical sources contemporary to Jesus’ time period, the discusses the writings by philosophers and other authors in regard to the topic, and closs with chapters on comparative religion and mythology for sources of the Christ Myth.
List of Contents (421 pages in all):
Preface
1. Christ’s Real Existence Impossible
2. Silence of Contemporary Writers
3. Christian Evidence
4. The Infancy of Christ
5. The Ministry of Christ
6. The Crucifixion of Christ
7. The Resurrection of Christ
8. His Character and Teachings
9. The Christ a Myth
10. Sources of the Christ Myth: Ancient Religions
11. Sources of the Christ Myth: Pagan Divinities
12. Sources of the Christ Myth: Conclusion
Index
From the Preface:
(…) Two notable works controverting the divinity of Christ appeared in the last century, the Leben Jesu of Strauss, and the Vie de Jesus of Renan. Strauss in his work, one of the masterpieces of Freethought literature, endeavors to prove, and proves to the satisfaction of a majority of his readers, that Jesus Christ is a historical myth. This work possesses permanent value, but it was written for the scholar and that for the general reader. In the German and Latin versions, and in the admirable English translation of Marian Evans (George Eliot), the citations from the Gospels — and they are many — are in Greek.
Renan’s “Life of Jesus,” written in Palestine, has had, especially in its abridged form, an immense circulation, and has been a potent factor in the dethronement of Christ. It is a charming book and displays great learning. But it is a romance, not a biography. The Jesus of Renan, like the Satan of Milton, while suggested by the Bible, is a modern creation. The warp is to be found in the Four Gospels, but the woof was spun in the brain of the brilliant Frenchman. (…)
Chapter 2: Silence of Contemporary Writers
Another proof that the Christ of Christianity is a fabulous and not a historical character is the silence of the writers who lived during and immediately following the time he is said to have existed.
That a man named Jesus, an obscure religious teacher, the basis of this fabulous Christ, lived in Palestine about nineteen hundred years ago, may be true. But of this man we know nothing. His biography has not been written. Renan and others have attempted to write it, but have failed — have failed because no materials for such a work exist. Contemporary writers have left us not one word concerning him. For generations afterward, outside of a few theological epistles, we find no mention of him.
The following is a list of writers who lived and wrote during the time, or within a century after the time, that Christ is said to have lived and performed his wonderful works:
Josephus, Philo-Judaeus, Seneca, Pliny the Elder, Suetonius, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Silius Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Hermogones, Valerius Maximus, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Appian, Theon of Smyrna, Phlegon, Pompon Mela, Quintius Curtius, Lucian, Pausanias, Valerius Flaccus, Florus Lucius, Favorinus, Phaedrus, Damis, Aulus Gellius, Columella, Dio Chrysostom, Lysias, Appion of Alexandria
Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ.
[snip the rest of the chapter, where the writings of each of those mentioned authors are examined in regard to possible references to Christ, also notes cross-references of classical writers quoting from others]
He existed. I was there. But I died when he was 8 years old, so who knows what happened after that. 😀
What lies do supposed they will be writing about any of you 300 years from now? Did you eat babies for breakfast? Or heal the lame? Or entertain the masses? 😀
The sceptical inconvenient goof
Demands all sorts of reason and proof
These dolts believe lies
That they see with their eyes
Suckers sucked in by spoof.
Ironically, the more I read the less convinced I am of Mythicism. I look forward to Carrier’s book, but for now I have to say that the simplest explanation for the origins of the cult, is indeed the existence of an apocalyptic preacher who was crucified and then seen in visions by his followers (Simon Peter first?) due to grief. Annoying.
One of the most convincing explainations I’ve read for the rise of the Christ cult was Philip Pullmans The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ. Yes, it’s fiction – just to be sure the religidiots realised it was fiction an so didn’t take too much offence, “This Is A Story” (or something similar) was printed in very large type on the frontispiece – but the story he tells makes far more sense than the ‘official’ version, is written better and is one of those ‘easy-to-read’ books, probably due to the fact that it’s primarily aimed at older children, that gets its message over without requiring too much thought on the part of the reader. It could be the first bit of rationalising of the Bible that they’re exposed to, and that can’t be a bad thing. I’d recommend anybody with kids to buy gifts for gets them a copy of the book.
Darwin Harmless, with regards to my post to you on the last thread re. our resident poet; forget I said anything! On reading todays offering I’ve changed my mind. He’s obviously a troll, he just can’t decide which side to troll for. Is there a religio-atheist version of bi-curious?
I think that Yeshua Ben Yosef Bin Miriam was a real person. Perhaps he tried to start a passive-resistance movement against Rome, but he was certainly not anything divine. I would like to have known him. He was certainly well ahead of his time, that’s why the Romans killed him.
There are many explanations for the lack of references, that can be found from non-religious sources:
1. He was chilling in India and had his phone off. Source
2. He had converted to Buddhism and was chilling in India Source
3. He was known as the Buddha (plenty of references) and he reached the middle east just in time to fake his crucifixion <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0756683/" Source
It’s also possible that Jesus was Chinese instead and nobody has so far searched for references to his life in Mandarin. At the very least his younger brother was Chinese (who was among other things, responsible for the second bloodiest war in history).
Sili: No need for his followers to see him “in visions”. Roman style crucifixion was intended to be a long and tortuous process, usually taking days. The standard Christian story is that he was only crucified for an afternoon, so it is entirely plausible that he was taken down when he was still alive. The only odd assumption you have to make is that the Roman soldiers were not paying close attention to the difference between “looks dead” and “really dead”. After all, they had to stay and keep watch; maybe they did not want to work late.
A survivor of such an event would have noticeable scars and a serious incentive to find somewhere else to be, both consistent with the Christian’s description.
Mark S:
Bearing in mind his penultimate words – ‘Father, why hast thou forsaken me?’, one might also safely assume that he repented of banging on about how marvellous and forgiving God was, and opted for a quiet life, somewhere down the Silk Road…
Decades later, along comes the Greek nutter Saul, sorry Paul (never trust a leader who changes his name) with the twisted notion of redemption, and the rest is not very nice history.
I have always thought that if Jesus ever returned in glory and entered a cathedral, he would vomit on the altar. To quote the late, great Bill Hicks, ‘Do you really think He ever wants to see another fucking cross?’
Whether Jesus existed depends on what you mean by ‘Jesus’. If you mean someone called ‘Yeshua’ born to a mother named ‘Miriam’, then there might have been quite a few people living at about that time who met that description. If you mean someone who was the son of God or someone who performed miracles, then there was almost certainly no such person. But how many of the things said about his life need to correspond to a real person for us to say he existed? It’s just a semantic argument disguised as a historical question, in my opinion.
Just came across a great quote from Ben Goldacre’s ‘Bad Science’:
‘You can’t reason people out of positions they didn’t reason themselves into.’
A useful tool for anyone struggling to understand why religion persists and prospers, when it should long ago have melted back into its constituent elements: politics, ethics, psychology, myth, and theatre.
An excellent choice of book, Hotrats. There’s a wonderful quote in the chapter covering alternative medicine/double-blind testing, but
I won’t spoil it for anybody who hasn’t yet read the book. Suffice to say it made me giggle.
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
January 22, 2008
mo = biff tannen.
My first thought too. How can he get back? – needs a miracle.
Or is this a “Tinker Bell” situation? Do we all have to shout out “I believe” to bring him back?
The suspense has me on the edge of my seat!
Is this a reference to Terry Pratchett’s “Small Gods”?
“It’s a god-eat-god world,” eh?
Don’t worry folks, he’s only gone for a dump.
I had always assumed that, like royalty, Jesus did not do that sort of thing. I see no mention of it in the bible. I need chapter & verse.
HFB, I give you;
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2006/01/30/rank/
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/06/29/gasp/
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2009/12/15/retch/
Can anyone explain the use of the Apple Logo on Mo’s computer? Did Mo get a kickback from Apple? Are Apple computers “Godly”? Are PC from the Satan? Please explain!
Note that the Christ Myth Theory thing is not a modern, recent idea.
The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence
by John E. Remsberg
Originally published: New York: The Truth Seeker Company, 1909.
You can find the whole textbook in online HTML form here:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/rmsbrg00.htm
In case you wonder, it’s a scholarly text, not a wild-eyed anti-Christianity propaganda piece.
It contrasts the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth, who may or may not have existed, with the miraculous figure of Jesus the Christ. It offers an exhausting analysis of literary sources contrasting the Bible’s and the Church’s claims with other, historical sources contemporary to Jesus’ time period, the discusses the writings by philosophers and other authors in regard to the topic, and closs with chapters on comparative religion and mythology for sources of the Christ Myth.
List of Contents (421 pages in all):
Preface
1. Christ’s Real Existence Impossible
2. Silence of Contemporary Writers
3. Christian Evidence
4. The Infancy of Christ
5. The Ministry of Christ
6. The Crucifixion of Christ
7. The Resurrection of Christ
8. His Character and Teachings
9. The Christ a Myth
10. Sources of the Christ Myth: Ancient Religions
11. Sources of the Christ Myth: Pagan Divinities
12. Sources of the Christ Myth: Conclusion
Index
From the Preface:
(…) Two notable works controverting the divinity of Christ appeared in the last century, the Leben Jesu of Strauss, and the Vie de Jesus of Renan. Strauss in his work, one of the masterpieces of Freethought literature, endeavors to prove, and proves to the satisfaction of a majority of his readers, that Jesus Christ is a historical myth. This work possesses permanent value, but it was written for the scholar and that for the general reader. In the German and Latin versions, and in the admirable English translation of Marian Evans (George Eliot), the citations from the Gospels — and they are many — are in Greek.
Renan’s “Life of Jesus,” written in Palestine, has had, especially in its abridged form, an immense circulation, and has been a potent factor in the dethronement of Christ. It is a charming book and displays great learning. But it is a romance, not a biography. The Jesus of Renan, like the Satan of Milton, while suggested by the Bible, is a modern creation. The warp is to be found in the Four Gospels, but the woof was spun in the brain of the brilliant Frenchman. (…)
Chapter 2: Silence of Contemporary Writers
Another proof that the Christ of Christianity is a fabulous and not a historical character is the silence of the writers who lived during and immediately following the time he is said to have existed.
That a man named Jesus, an obscure religious teacher, the basis of this fabulous Christ, lived in Palestine about nineteen hundred years ago, may be true. But of this man we know nothing. His biography has not been written. Renan and others have attempted to write it, but have failed — have failed because no materials for such a work exist. Contemporary writers have left us not one word concerning him. For generations afterward, outside of a few theological epistles, we find no mention of him.
The following is a list of writers who lived and wrote during the time, or within a century after the time, that Christ is said to have lived and performed his wonderful works:
Josephus, Philo-Judaeus, Seneca, Pliny the Elder, Suetonius, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Silius Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Hermogones, Valerius Maximus, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Appian, Theon of Smyrna, Phlegon, Pompon Mela, Quintius Curtius, Lucian, Pausanias, Valerius Flaccus, Florus Lucius, Favorinus, Phaedrus, Damis, Aulus Gellius, Columella, Dio Chrysostom, Lysias, Appion of Alexandria
Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ.
[snip the rest of the chapter, where the writings of each of those mentioned authors are examined in regard to possible references to Christ, also notes cross-references of classical writers quoting from others]
Oh, poor Mo – what’s he gone and done? It’s as if Laurel had disappeared Hardy.
He existed. I was there. But I died when he was 8 years old, so who knows what happened after that. 😀
What lies do supposed they will be writing about any of you 300 years from now? Did you eat babies for breakfast? Or heal the lame? Or entertain the masses? 😀
There IS proof of Jesus’ existence. In the future someone goes back in time to gather it.
http://everything2.com/title/A+Proof+In+Time?author_id=2018863#thalio
@Ophelia: I laughed aloud at your comment, thank you! (and a little voice in my brain piped up that J would be Stan and M would be Ollie.)
The sceptical inconvenient goof
Demands all sorts of reason and proof
These dolts believe lies
That they see with their eyes
Suckers sucked in by spoof.
Ironically, the more I read the less convinced I am of Mythicism. I look forward to Carrier’s book, but for now I have to say that the simplest explanation for the origins of the cult, is indeed the existence of an apocalyptic preacher who was crucified and then seen in visions by his followers (Simon Peter first?) due to grief. Annoying.
One of the most convincing explainations I’ve read for the rise of the Christ cult was Philip Pullmans The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ. Yes, it’s fiction – just to be sure the religidiots realised it was fiction an so didn’t take too much offence, “This Is A Story” (or something similar) was printed in very large type on the frontispiece – but the story he tells makes far more sense than the ‘official’ version, is written better and is one of those ‘easy-to-read’ books, probably due to the fact that it’s primarily aimed at older children, that gets its message over without requiring too much thought on the part of the reader. It could be the first bit of rationalising of the Bible that they’re exposed to, and that can’t be a bad thing. I’d recommend anybody with kids to buy gifts for gets them a copy of the book.
Darwin Harmless, with regards to my post to you on the last thread re. our resident poet; forget I said anything! On reading todays offering I’ve changed my mind. He’s obviously a troll, he just can’t decide which side to troll for. Is there a religio-atheist version of bi-curious?
I think that Yeshua Ben Yosef Bin Miriam was a real person. Perhaps he tried to start a passive-resistance movement against Rome, but he was certainly not anything divine. I would like to have known him. He was certainly well ahead of his time, that’s why the Romans killed him.
He’ll appear in the shower and the last few strips will turn out to have been a dream….
Maybe Mo’s using JC’s computer. An apple on that would be appropriate, all the more so with a bite taken out of it.
There are many explanations for the lack of references, that can be found from non-religious sources:
1. He was chilling in India and had his phone off. Source
2. He had converted to Buddhism and was chilling in India Source
3. He was known as the Buddha (plenty of references) and he reached the middle east just in time to fake his crucifixion <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0756683/" Source
It’s also possible that Jesus was Chinese instead and nobody has so far searched for references to his life in Mandarin. At the very least his younger brother was Chinese (who was among other things, responsible for the second bloodiest war in history).
It’s happened before – http://www.jesusandmo.net/2011/08/31/tinks2/
He should be OK.
Don’t worry, he’ll be back in three days because he never misses “60 Minutes”.
Sili: No need for his followers to see him “in visions”. Roman style crucifixion was intended to be a long and tortuous process, usually taking days. The standard Christian story is that he was only crucified for an afternoon, so it is entirely plausible that he was taken down when he was still alive. The only odd assumption you have to make is that the Roman soldiers were not paying close attention to the difference between “looks dead” and “really dead”. After all, they had to stay and keep watch; maybe they did not want to work late.
A survivor of such an event would have noticeable scars and a serious incentive to find somewhere else to be, both consistent with the Christian’s description.
Mark S:
Bearing in mind his penultimate words – ‘Father, why hast thou forsaken me?’, one might also safely assume that he repented of banging on about how marvellous and forgiving God was, and opted for a quiet life, somewhere down the Silk Road…
Decades later, along comes the Greek nutter Saul, sorry Paul (never trust a leader who changes his name) with the twisted notion of redemption, and the rest is not very nice history.
I have always thought that if Jesus ever returned in glory and entered a cathedral, he would vomit on the altar. To quote the late, great Bill Hicks, ‘Do you really think He ever wants to see another fucking cross?’
Whoa, lots happening here on this one.
@AoS – Touché. I actually wanted C&V from the bible, but thanks for remoinding me of these classics – I particularly like “Rank”.
@ Christina – TL;DR; lighten up this is meant to be fun!
@ Ophelia – 🙂
@ Nasser – A limerick that almost works – well done!
@ JoJo – Brilliant!
@ martin_z – You’re right! I must have had that at the back of my haggis when I posted earlier.
Acolyte of Saga, no worries. I was sure you would come to your senses regarding NBH and his limerick gimmick.
Whether Jesus existed depends on what you mean by ‘Jesus’. If you mean someone called ‘Yeshua’ born to a mother named ‘Miriam’, then there might have been quite a few people living at about that time who met that description. If you mean someone who was the son of God or someone who performed miracles, then there was almost certainly no such person. But how many of the things said about his life need to correspond to a real person for us to say he existed? It’s just a semantic argument disguised as a historical question, in my opinion.
@mano: Thank you. ^_^
(Not quite how I would have put it, but I think you essentially hit the nail into the cross.)
Just came across a great quote from Ben Goldacre’s ‘Bad Science’:
‘You can’t reason people out of positions they didn’t reason themselves into.’
A useful tool for anyone struggling to understand why religion persists and prospers, when it should long ago have melted back into its constituent elements: politics, ethics, psychology, myth, and theatre.
An excellent choice of book, Hotrats. There’s a wonderful quote in the chapter covering alternative medicine/double-blind testing, but
I won’t spoil it for anybody who hasn’t yet read the book. Suffice to say it made me giggle.
Great one!