Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • I read a pretty good analysis a while back that a lot of the Nativity mythology is derived from a series of mistranslations and misunderstandings. The text is probably saying that Jesus was born in the lower room of Joseph's family ancestral home (kataluma - which could also mean "inn" but is probably referring to the home in this context). It was not uncommon for people to have animal feeding troughs (mangers) in this area because animals were often brought inside at night.
  • Idealized, historically inaccurate Jesus is Best Jesus.
  • Sybarite: I read a pretty good analysis a while back that a lot of the Nativity mythology is derived from a series of mistranslations and misunderstandings.


    I was told the Bible was the inerrant word, now you are telling me different. Well. I'm sorry, but I am going to have to set you on fire now.
  • Ennuipoet: Sybarite: I read a pretty good analysis a while back that a lot of the Nativity mythology is derived from a series of mistranslations and misunderstandings.

    I was told the Bible was the inerrant word, now you are telling me different. Well. I'm sorry, but I am going to have to set you on fire now.


    I love this one. Inerrant word in which language?

    "It is a subtlety that God learned Greek when he wanted to become a writer, and also that he did not learn it well."

    - Nietzsche
  • Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.

    FFS - some guy in Rome says that their mythos doesn't mention some of the details that were added to the myth later, and next thing you know people are upset enough by the meaning of this offhand remark that the guys who consider themselves in charge have to put out a statement that he didn't just change the entire belief system.

    Am I the only one who thinks this is not healthy?
  • Diogenes: Ennuipoet: Sybarite: I read a pretty good analysis a while back that a lot of the Nativity mythology is derived from a series of mistranslations and misunderstandings.

    I was told the Bible was the inerrant word, now you are telling me different. Well. I'm sorry, but I am going to have to set you on fire now.

    I love this one. Inerrant word in which language?

    "It is a subtlety that God learned Greek when he wanted to become a writer, and also that he did not learn it well."

    - Nietzsche


    Suggesting God doesn't know all languages? Double burnin'.

    Quoting Nietzsche? Triple burnin'.
  • No animals around but did he at least have a box of scraps around like Tony Stark?
  • i1151.photobucket.comView Full Size

    Have you heard one of us broads when we're giving birth?
    The screaming & hollering would cause animals to stampede to the nearest exit - or bust a hole in the wall to make one!
    That Pope guy knows his sh*t.
  • Christians really are the lambs of God. They meander around in a bewildered panic and are easily herded into big buildings where they a rendered down into things that have nothing to do with sausage.

  • Benevolent Misanthrope


    Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    I think they should present the Jesus figure in the context of a parable: describe him as a nice guy who did things for other people and wanted them to be nice to one another, and present some examples of what he did. Leave the supernatural stuff out. Take for example the loaves and fishes: don't say he performed a miracle; say he persuaded the townspeople to cooperate and barter and everyone was better off. It's more believable and makes a better example.
  • Next thing you'll be telling me is Jesus wasn't white!
  • Jon Stewart covered this very well.

    The pope says no animals are mentioned in the bible.

    Stewart pointed out that no popes are mentioned in it, either.
  • Englebert Slaptyback: Benevolent Misanthrope

    Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    I think they should present the Jesus figure in the context of a parable: describe him as a nice guy who did things for other people and wanted them to be nice to one another, and present some examples of what he did. Leave the supernatural stuff out. Take for example the loaves and fishes: don't say he performed a miracle; say he persuaded the townspeople to cooperate and barter and everyone was better off. It's more believable and makes a better example.


    My old Catholic priest kind of explained the miracle of fish and loaves that way.

    If you were going to see this guy talk, you'd probably take some food with you. After all, don't many of us bring food on road trips or hikes or walks. Well, you see this very inspirational guy sharing food, and encouraging others to do the same. So you share your food with your neighbors. Some brought a lot, some not so much, but in the end, everyone is fed.

    It's was actually a lot more powerful a story that way than "Jesus magicked up some extra fish and bread, lol"
  • In a nutshell, Mary and Joesph show up in Bethlehem to pay their taxes. They aren't legally married, but she's knocked up. The authorities are like, "this is bullshiat." Mary is all "Waaahhh." Joesph is like, "I know right?" The authorities want to flog the shiat out of Mary, but Joesph begs them to let him marry her instead. He even volunteers to take her beating for her, which leaves the villagers like "woah damn, biatch got a tight one." God heard that and tore all their dicks off in their sleep. Meanwhile, Mary is all, "I broke it riding horseback when I was eleven! It must be some miracle type shiat." People were like "ok! we don't have shiat going on right now to excite us so let's all agree to believe in some shiat and get worked up." Lots of dancing and wine drinking and petting the animals ensued. And that's why we have eggnog.
  • meat0918: Englebert Slaptyback: Benevolent Misanthrope

    Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    I think they should present the Jesus figure in the context of a parable: describe him as a nice guy who did things for other people and wanted them to be nice to one another, and present some examples of what he did. Leave the supernatural stuff out. Take for example the loaves and fishes: don't say he performed a miracle; say he persuaded the townspeople to cooperate and barter and everyone was better off. It's more believable and makes a better example.

    My old Catholic priest kind of explained the miracle of fish and loaves that way.

    If you were going to see this guy talk, you'd probably take some food with you. After all, don't many of us bring food on road trips or hikes or walks. Well, you see this very inspirational guy sharing food, and encouraging others to do the same. So you share your food with your neighbors. Some brought a lot, some not so much, but in the end, everyone is fed.

    It's was actually a lot more powerful a story that way than "Jesus magicked up some extra fish and bread, lol"


    Any way you tell it, it's a dull story, true or not.
  • meat0918: Englebert Slaptyback: Benevolent Misanthrope

    Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    I think they should present the Jesus figure in the context of a parable: describe him as a nice guy who did things for other people and wanted them to be nice to one another, and present some examples of what he did. Leave the supernatural stuff out. Take for example the loaves and fishes: don't say he performed a miracle; say he persuaded the townspeople to cooperate and barter and everyone was better off. It's more believable and makes a better example.

    My old Catholic priest kind of explained the miracle of fish and loaves that way.

    If you were going to see this guy talk, you'd probably take some food with you. After all, don't many of us bring food on road trips or hikes or walks. Well, you see this very inspirational guy sharing food, and encouraging others to do the same. So you share your food with your neighbors. Some brought a lot, some not so much, but in the end, everyone is fed.

    It's was actually a lot more powerful a story that way than "Jesus magicked up some extra fish and bread, lol"


    The real message is not one that is in favor with the powers that be: "Share equally and everyone will have enough" = ohmgardSocialzm!! But "pray for magic and Jesus will save you" doesn't mention anything about the rich having to share.
  • spentmiles: In a nutshell, Mary and Joesph show up in Bethlehem to pay their taxes. They aren't legally married, but she's knocked up. The authorities are like, "this is bullshiat." Mary is all "Waaahhh." Joesph is like, "I know right?" The authorities want to flog the shiat out of Mary, but Joesph begs them to let him marry her instead. He even volunteers to take her beating for her, which leaves the villagers like "woah damn, biatch got a tight one." God heard that and tore all their dicks off in their sleep. Meanwhile, Mary is all, "I broke it riding horseback when I was eleven! It must be some miracle type shiat." People were like "ok! we don't have shiat going on right now to excite us so let's all agree to believe in some shiat and get worked up." Lots of dancing and wine drinking and petting the animals ensued. And that's why we have eggnog.


    Which is interesting in that going to the place of birth to pay taxes goes against every other recorded incident involving taxes in the Roman Empire. Thousands of inscriptions go into great detail of how taxes were collected, but this one time they apparently changed their mind for one or two towns in the middle of one province.
  • Did he also cover the "didn't happen in December" bit?

    /Merry Saturnalia, everyone!
  • Englebert Slaptyback: Benevolent Misanthrope

    Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    I think they should present the Jesus figure in the context of a parable: describe him as a nice guy who did things for other people and wanted them to be nice to one another, and present some examples of what he did. Leave the supernatural stuff out. Take for example the loaves and fishes: don't say he performed a miracle; say he persuaded the townspeople to cooperate and barter and everyone was better off. It's more believable and makes a better example.


    So basically the Jefferson Bible.
  • Did the Pope mention that people don't travel to participate in a census, as it defeats the entire point of a census?
  • Diogenes: Ennuipoet: Sybarite: I read a pretty good analysis a while back that a lot of the Nativity mythology is derived from a series of mistranslations and misunderstandings.

    I was told the Bible was the inerrant word, now you are telling me different. Well. I'm sorry, but I am going to have to set you on fire now.

    I love this one. Inerrant word in which language?


    In all of them.

    Wouldn't god be there watching over the translators? He finds time to watch every time somebody has sex or says a bad word, why wouldn't he be there for the translation of his divine book? It's important - people are supposed to use as a guide for getting into heaven!
  • i171.photobucket.comView Full Size


    Santa adds "the pope" under "Reasons Christmas can be Cancelled" on the Christmas Special Plot List.
  • Not sure why xmas is celebrated except for consuming. Where the hell is Jesus and Santa!
  • Benevolent Misanthrope: Well - if he wants to be as historically correct as possible, he could mention that there is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus, outside of the oral history copied into the religious works of the religion built around him.


    Not sure if troll or just went to public school...

    Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted. While there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30-36 AD. Most scholars hold that Jesus lived in Galilee and Judea, did not preach or study elsewhere and that he spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and Greek. Although scholars differ on the reconstruction of the specific episodes of the life of Jesus, the two events whose historicity is subject to "almost universal assent" are that he was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic ity_of_Jesus
  • Load 25 of 28 newer comments

This thread is closed to new comments.