I like one of the early passages in Numbers. The one where God commands his minions to slaughter everyone in a conquered village except for the girls “who have not known a man”. Those he gives to the soldiers. I don’t endorse such atrocities, but it’s fun to remind Christians their “loving” deity is guilty of promoting genocide and mass child sex slavery.
“…so loved the world”; apparently he didn’t care much for its inhabitants. Drowned an estimated 2.5 million in the flood. How many Egyptians had children that were killed during Passover for…no reason? Forty-two kids torn to bits by bears.
But it’s all good, his ghostly alter ego raped a young woman who gave birth to a guy who mostly hung around with twelve other guys. Gave up his whole weekend—well, most of it (the bar-hopping on Friday and Saturday nights)—for the world he loved. Could have been worse, could have taken a page from Greek mythology and given Mary a golden shower, like Zeus did. Or do the dirty deed as a swan.
“And Gallio cared for none of these things.”
Gallio was the proconsul of Achaia when people went in for religious riots. He listened for a bit and then decided to send out the riot squad to settle the argument.
“Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!”
And now the spin.
In Psalm 137:9, it cannot be assumed that the inspired writer was saying that God commanded anyone to dash the heads of children against a stone. The idea that the text merely describes what the Medes and the Persians would do in the future fits the context perfectly. The way the word “happy” is used throughout the Bible allows for the author to be using it in Psalm 137:9 in a way that can describe a fleeting feeling that can be the result of evil actions. This feeling has nothing to do with a blessing or commendation from God. The way the skeptic pulls this passage from its context and misinterprets it says more about the skeptic’s dishonesty when dealing with the biblical text than it does about God’s morality.
I prefer Christopher Hitchens’s revised ten commandments:
IV: Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child.
Maybe a bit off topic, but if you have been watching USA news lately you may have heard vulgarities spewing forth from a certain presidential candidate. Though he has said many damning things, I think, in his heart, he would love to say this… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6st-RN8u5I
Alverant — that seems to be Numbers 31:17-18, but I’m a little disappointed that it turns out to be Moses’ idea. Yahhahweh just sends them all out to wipe out the Midianites, and afterwards puts in a word for the priests to get their share of the loot, but it’s Moses who’s mad when the soldiers bring back a bunch of grown women.
Clearly Yahhahweh has no big problem with the slaughtering and enslavement, and I guess it’s a fair sample. I wished I had this up my sleeve Monday when the Jehovee Witnesses rolled up. Not that I need to deal with them, but I need the language practice (in Portuguese.) Like everyone who starts trying to convert me, they always start with how could all these amazing things be here without some creator etc., a ridiculously abstract idea that’s essentially meaningless in the absence of any real knowledge of creators and creation, and then try to hop over the assumption that this undefined creator turns out to be Yahhahweh. Passages like that illustrate pretty clearly that whatever you think about unimaginable creators, Yahhahweh is a creation of priests and has been whatever they want him to be in their time and place.
If it’s not proven by experiment and mathematical scrutiny then it’s bollocks. It’s like groundhog day everytime a strip is posted. Religious bollox needs to be consigned to history like flat earth lunacy or earth centric tosh…
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
March 31, 2006
I like one of the early passages in Numbers. The one where God commands his minions to slaughter everyone in a conquered village except for the girls “who have not known a man”. Those he gives to the soldiers. I don’t endorse such atrocities, but it’s fun to remind Christians their “loving” deity is guilty of promoting genocide and mass child sex slavery.
“…so loved the world”; apparently he didn’t care much for its inhabitants. Drowned an estimated 2.5 million in the flood. How many Egyptians had children that were killed during Passover for…no reason? Forty-two kids torn to bits by bears.
But it’s all good, his ghostly alter ego raped a young woman who gave birth to a guy who mostly hung around with twelve other guys. Gave up his whole weekend—well, most of it (the bar-hopping on Friday and Saturday nights)—for the world he loved. Could have been worse, could have taken a page from Greek mythology and given Mary a golden shower, like Zeus did. Or do the dirty deed as a swan.
Do I need to add /s to indicate sarcasm? 😉
“And Gallio cared for none of these things.”
Gallio was the proconsul of Achaia when people went in for religious riots. He listened for a bit and then decided to send out the riot squad to settle the argument.
Psalm 137:9 (ESV)
“Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!”
And now the spin.
In Psalm 137:9, it cannot be assumed that the inspired writer was saying that God commanded anyone to dash the heads of children against a stone. The idea that the text merely describes what the Medes and the Persians would do in the future fits the context perfectly. The way the word “happy” is used throughout the Bible allows for the author to be using it in Psalm 137:9 in a way that can describe a fleeting feeling that can be the result of evil actions. This feeling has nothing to do with a blessing or commendation from God. The way the skeptic pulls this passage from its context and misinterprets it says more about the skeptic’s dishonesty when dealing with the biblical text than it does about God’s morality.
I prefer Christopher Hitchens’s revised ten commandments:
IV: Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child.
I rather like Ezekiel 4:15:
Then he said to me, “See, I assign to you cow’s dung instead of human dung, on which you may prepare your bread.”
Easy proof the bible only feeds you shit.
I fail to see why Mo would be harping about the ‘core tenets of faith not being true’
Succubus ov Satan: Obviously, because it’s not a core tenet of his faith being questioned. Mo has no problem with Christianity being the wrong faith.
Maybe a bit off topic, but if you have been watching USA news lately you may have heard vulgarities spewing forth from a certain presidential candidate. Though he has said many damning things, I think, in his heart, he would love to say this… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6st-RN8u5I
Alverant — that seems to be Numbers 31:17-18, but I’m a little disappointed that it turns out to be Moses’ idea. Yahhahweh just sends them all out to wipe out the Midianites, and afterwards puts in a word for the priests to get their share of the loot, but it’s Moses who’s mad when the soldiers bring back a bunch of grown women.
Clearly Yahhahweh has no big problem with the slaughtering and enslavement, and I guess it’s a fair sample. I wished I had this up my sleeve Monday when the Jehovee Witnesses rolled up. Not that I need to deal with them, but I need the language practice (in Portuguese.) Like everyone who starts trying to convert me, they always start with how could all these amazing things be here without some creator etc., a ridiculously abstract idea that’s essentially meaningless in the absence of any real knowledge of creators and creation, and then try to hop over the assumption that this undefined creator turns out to be Yahhahweh. Passages like that illustrate pretty clearly that whatever you think about unimaginable creators, Yahhahweh is a creation of priests and has been whatever they want him to be in their time and place.
If it’s not proven by experiment and mathematical scrutiny then it’s bollocks. It’s like groundhog day everytime a strip is posted. Religious bollox needs to be consigned to history like flat earth lunacy or earth centric tosh…