[Jesus sits on a rock, speaking]
A new command I give you:
Love one another
[an angry character talks back to Jesus]
What if they're something bad like gay, trans, brown, or communist though?
[Jesus is facepalming on his rock]
I don't want to be a messiah anymore
As an ex-muslim i can confidently say quran does not tell us to love one another, it tells us to love our muslim brothers and rape, kill, torture everyone else.
I am just grateful most muslims are delusional people who have never read a single word of their book (in their native language) and live a life nowhere as close to that is depicted in the book. There is a reason why jihadism etc. is more popular in Arabic speaking countries, because they actually understand the thing they are reading.
counterpoint trojan war
also that one fence made out of penises that they keep trying to enter in the olympics
I don't see the problem. Love them and stone them, like the law demands. No need to complicate it any further.
Just a note, Jesus wasn't actually purple even though he is depicted here as such.
actually, many scholars today believe jesus most likely was purple, as a result of the water in his body being transmuted into wine. this is why in modern catholic tradition, wine is used to represent the blood of christ.
Guy was a walking DUI, with a BAC of 100%.
this is why the bible contains no mention of jesus driving a car or reciting the alphabet backwards
i mean he was chronically wasted. he thought it went alpha, omega, delta, gamma...
If his blood were wine it would have an abv of between 8-14 percent, although I believe wine was significantly diluted back then.
At that point id argue it is an ABC
Then explain all the portraits! /s
Ecce Muppo. Unknown, 2026
Of course, canon Jesus reply would be "but we're brown ourselves though?"
Contrariwise, you are also commanded to love racists, homophobes, transphobes, and authoritarians. You can certainly try to convince them away from those stances, but you are still supposed to be kind, even generous, to the persons.
Unconditional love can be heartbeatingly hard.
Compassionate love does not require kindness and generosity in the way you mean those words. It does not require making yourself vulnerable to danger, it does not require giving material or emotional support. You should still be able to recognize and respond to the humanity in a flawed person.
I believe if you are following the words of Jesus, then yes, it does require kindness and generosity, with their standard meanings. "Love your neighbor as yourself." – Jesus
I agree that it doesn't require sacrificing your safety.
Good thing I'm not beholden to that religion, then!
I’m going with the paradox of tolerance on that.
Yeah. I still think we owe the intolerant subsistence, but because of the Paradox of Tolerance, I think intolerance could be grounds for denial of political power--any of the 4 boxes (soap, ballot, jury, ammo)--at least for the duration of the intolerance (but there should be some method to "rehabilitate" a person access to political power after the are no longer intolerant).
I also think it might be difficult to adjudicate "intolerance" in some cases, but in the most necessary of cases it is quite clear.
don't click if you don't want a little theology. i am just going to shotgun fire off some bullshit.
okay, so: former christian clergy and current head of a pagan cult (i worship the god of convergent evolution, blasphemy, gluttony, and atheism) current membership 4, 5 when my mormon mother is humoring me and comes to the crab shack for lunch. my current job is church musician because the instrument [not gonna say which. ask and i'll say yes] i play is very very expensive, i can't afford one (i literally only have ever met one individual who owns one) and churches tend to own them. i can trade my services for an hour a week of practice time and two songs performance time a month unless i can figure out a way to move at least 2500 miles to ply my musical trade for real. or someone wants to give me 76 grand for an instrument.
christianity's commandment to love people does not conflict with the paradox of tolerance. you're not just commanded to love your neighbors, you're commanded to love your enemies.
there's a lot of cultural bullshit in the turn the other cheek and etc shit in the parables jesus teaches. like, slapping someone on the right cheek was a small insult, but slapping them on the left cheek was a big one. so turning the other cheek doesn't just mean give them another chance to hurt you, it's teaching the christians of that time that if someone is insulting you by slapping you in the face, a very culturally specific insult, give them the other cheek and invite them to make it a bigger insult. be like "hey i know i'm a christian and all. show everyone around here how big and tough you are picking on me". i try to think about it. i've tried it. Deescalation through escalation.
like Giles Corey.
Only money lenders (we totally didn't secretly mean Jews)
It's amazing that a sect leader that promoted peace and frugality unknowingly created one of the most violent and greedy religions.
Yes it certainly morphs after Constantine makes it the state religion, rather than a cult.
I am reading a book on the Baltic Crusades and it was talking about the diametrically opposed ideas of state violence and a pacifist religion. Essentially, pacifism doesn't work as a state policy. The Christian church struggled to decide what violence the state should be able to commit.
Augustine, thought war could be justified in certain circumstances, one of which was if the following peace created more good than the evil if the war wasn't fought.
Nowadays, I don't think people even know that Christianity was/is a pacifist movement.
if the following peace created more good than the evil if the war wasn’t fought.
That's the neat thing. For some reason every war does.
I mean, it should be obvious to Christians today that Jesus repeatedly and consistently made a clear distinction between the "kingdom of heaven" and secular nations. Separation of church and state was absolutely one of the premises the early church worked off of as a teaching of Jesus himself. The idea of a "Christian Nation" is indeed antithetical to the very foundations of Christianity. The early history of Christianity is pretty lost on people today and people are quite unaware of just how drastic the changes in Christianity were in the early 300s, and how gigantic of a deal it was for the Roman state to adopt Christianity at the time.
Jesus Christ as depicted in the Bible, with near 100% certainty never existed. He was no more real than Harry Potter.
The absolute lack of evidence of existence for a person claimed to be the most significant person that ever lived, and who performed numerous miracles, means that the only reasonable conclusion is that he never actually existed.
It would be like if we had zero evidence for the existence of Cleopatra, outside some scriptures written by a superstitious sect, where the earliest were written 2 generations after her death, by anonymous authors, and based only on hear say, and written in a place that it would take weeks to travel to or even months. With zero contemporary or first hand evidence.
And then imagine Cleopatra performed miracles regularly too.
AND Cleopatra lived 1 generation before Jesus, and 3 generations before the first "books" of the new testament were written.
But in difference to Jesus, there are loads of historical evidence that Cleopatra lived. When she lived, where she lived, and who she was. But not only her, also her family, like father and brother are well documented, and several events Cleopatra was part of are also very well documented.
Add to that that the search for evidence for the existence of Jesus is probably the by far biggest historical and archeological search in history. Spanning almost 2000 years, with massive financing from wealthy Churches especially the Catholic and Mormons have spend insane amounts of money searching for evidence, but not only that, also traditional historical institutions have participated, because they too, despite the absolute lack of reason for it, thought that there ought to be evidence for the existence of Jesus.
This search we know for sure started already in year 200!! And it was pretty intense for more than 1500 years!!! And the search often included scholars, because they too were deluded.
And their combined efforts have turned up nothing but fakes created after the fact. Zero actual historical evidence.
The few pieces (about 3) some claim are evidence are heavily refuted as obvious fakes too.
I mean, the idea that a guy made a weird sect, telling people to throw away all of their money (to who?) and performing tricks to pass them as miracles isn't so absurd. There's been a lot of scammers throughput history, he could have simply been one that happened to have a long lasting effect.
It's far from being the most significant person or whatever, more of a butterfly effect of some dude that wanted to have his own cult.
Isn't that him the romans were describing it, as a cult gathering people fast? That's probably all it was.
I mean, the idea that a guy made a weird sect,
There is still no evidence of that. It's just moving the goal post, but in reality it doesn't make a difference.
There are also communications between Christian groups where the personification of Christ is debated, to make it easier for people to understand Christianity.
t’s far from being the most significant person or whatever,
Again you are completely missing the point, because according to Christianity Jesus is clearly the moist significant person to ever live, and if the bible was true, that would be a fact, as his existence is claimed to be the salvation of billions of people through 2 millennia.
So saying he is not, is actually the same as supporting my claim that he never existed.
Isn’t that him the romans were describing it, as a cult gathering people fast?
No, Christianity was insignificant until the Romans themselves adopted it for political reasons.
I'm not saying that there is evidence, and I'm not sure what goal post I'm moving. My whole point was that the way Jesus is depicted by Christianity is as a weird sect leader that was promoting peace and frugality, and that it is ironic considering that the religion itself is quite the opposite.
I wasn't debating the proof of existence of Jesus and to be honest, I don't really care if he ever existed or not (and I would argue that most people don't, because most Christians would absolutely ignore anything that would prove that he didn't exist). My point was just to insist on the fact that Christianity has been for a pretty long time a religion of violence and greed, and that it is ironic.
the way Jesus is depicted by Christianity is as a weird sect leader
That's false Jesus is depicted by christianity as the son of god, with supernatural powers that allowed him to perform miracles, including rising from the dead, and ascending to heaven after.
that it is ironic considering that the religion itself is quite the opposite.
On that we agree 100%. But the Bible is full of contradictions, and even the new testament has different books about Jesus that try to deliver very different messages about him, when telling the same basic story.
Same way as it could work with Harry Potter if we didn't have copyright, and everybody could write their own story about him. And a century later a fan club makes a collection of the best 100 year old stories about Harry Potter that are decided by everyone to be canon. And they call it the Holy Bible of Harry Potter, and for 2000 years people actually believe it to be true, and that Harry Potter was a guy that really existed who could do magic.
“DID I FUCKING STUTTER?”
"That's it. Get my whip. And a table."
Nothing about all of that in the big book. Now wearing both wool and linen, however...
Another fun question: What if I'M gay, trans, brown or communist, what does the church have for me?
OH a special treat for you a lifetime of feeling guilty about who you are.
Or left handed!
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
😇 Be Nice!
🏘️ Community Standards
🧬 Keep it Real
📽️ Credit Where Credit is Due
📋 Post Formatting
📬 Post Frequency/SPAM
🏴☠️ Internationalization (i18n)
Sí, por favor [Spanish/Español]🍿 Moderation
The following artists are banned from the community.
It should be noted that when you make reports, it is your responsibility to provide rational reasoning why something should be removed. Saying it simply breaks community rules is not always good enough.
Note: This is not a rule, but a helpful suggestion.
When posting images, you should strive to add alt-text for screen readers to use to describe the image you're posting:
Another helpful thing to do is to provide a transcription of the text in your images, as well as brief descriptions of what's going on. (example)