Hmmmm i can see what you are saying, but Jesus didn’t commit suicide to repay debts of mankind, he died a martyr. He didn’t shove himself on a cross and put nails through his hands and feet etc.
Normally i am all for people mocking my beliefs and having opinions of their own – everyone is entitled, but for some reason claiming he commited suicide has really irked me. Mainly because i think you’re wrong and senstionalising for the sake of it, where as usually your humour lies in it’s truth.
I think this springs from the whole “all-knowing thing”. Plus, jesus is counted by many to be god himself on earth. Thus, if god is all-knowing, he knew his creation (man) would sin and that his son (himself) would be nailed to a cross.
You can still argue that he didn’t do it to himself, but god being omnipotent makes it hard to argue that he is not directly responsible for EVERYTHING… Free will or no.
I think Cassandra has forgotten about the Trinity. God kills one third of himself to appease another third that is pissed of with the world’s sin and (although he caused the suffering in the first place). So, is it one god monotheism or 3-god monotheism? Oh, but that Trinity thing is a mystery, isn’t it.
But it’s like Mark Twain said. It’s not the parts of the Bible I don’t understand that bother me. It’s the parts I DO understand.
Technically Cassandra is right. Christ didn’t ‘commit suicide’ so to speak. However to me, it’s kind of silly to be upset by that choice of words. To be a Christian, you have to believe that the Son-O-Man willingly sacrificed himself. (although a day of pain preceded and followed by eternal bliss, fulfillment and happiness never really seemed like much of a sacrifice to me, but whatever.) You have to accept that it was, in fact, a conscious choice to die, otherwise the whole crazy story makes even less of its twisted sense. Remember, Jesus had mad magic – smiting fig trees, ripping the souls out of the demoniacally possessed and shooting them in to pigs who would then dive off cliffs, super buoyancy – the dude was master of all sorts of crazy wizardry. If he had wanted to summon a level 40 minotaur to kick some Roman ass, he certainly could have. My point is that if Superman knowingly allows Lex Luthor stick a kryptonite thermometer up his heiney, technically that’s not suicide, but c’mon, Supes’, I mean wtf?
cassandra . . . if you know you are going to be killed because you won’t change your mind about some things you said don’t you think that is essentially the same thing as killing yourself?
personally i think that jesus killed himself because he would have lost all credibility if he didn’t. since he was pretty convinced about the whole uniting with the father in heaven thing it probably wasn’t much of a choice at all . . . like hmmmm . . . should i tell them all it was a joke, be laughed out of town, and have nothing but carpentry to fall back on . . . and even then no one would buy my stuff or even talk to me because i’m such a phoney OR . . . eternal peace and happiness in the divine light of heaven, sure i’ll have to take some beats but hey, look at the alternative.
Although technically you’re correct, as is Mark (different sides of the same coin) I think you should look at that line for what it is; an indictment of Christian fundamentalists’ literal translation of the Bible. It’s basically saying that there’s no independent thought involved and rather than try and decipher it in a constructive way CFs will always to simplify the message as much as possible.
For example, everyone knows there was no talking snake. The snake is a symbol for evil, the apple is a symbol for consciousness and the story of Adam and Eve is a fable about the birth of free will (at which point God washed his hands of the whole sorry affair and left us make up our own minds, content in the knowledge that he would always have the last laugh).
I don’t want to troll but I am an atheist with the same reason of the Barmaid’s.
God is angry with the sin, and sends…himself to be sacrificed to cleanse the sin. (Jesus is Lord or what?)
Isn’t it interesting that even non-beleivers are discussing Christ’s ‘auto-deicide’ or (Jesus’s execution) as if it actually happened when there is no historical record of it happening.
This is one of the tricks religion uses. Make up something so absurd that we feel compelled to comment. It thereby draws people into discussing it’s subtler points. It’s a cognitive trick, like a magician’s misdirection.
TaoAndZen, there’s no difference between discussing the fictional exploits of Christ and the exploits of any other fictional character. Discussing why Frodo didn’t keep the ring for himself doesn’t give credence to Tolkien’s story, after all.
David, you are quite right. Similarly, Jedi is the fourth largest ‘religion’ in the UK (according to the 2001 census). Fortunately those budding Jedi Knights don’t seriously beleive the Star Wars movies are the infalible word of god or that George Lucas is a holy prophet who will ascend to heaven on a magic X-wing fighter. (At least I hope not.)
Actually, I’d be a lot less assertively atheist if LOTR was the sacred text of the predominant religion. It’s far better literature than the bible and has far better moral standards (which isn’t hard to achieve, admittedly.) For historical accuracy it’s a draw.
The Valar destroyed Numenor because its king had the effrontery to set foot on the western continent (which was reserved for immortals because, well, just because). Okay, that’s just *one* divine genocide …
Tolkien himself was troubled by the existence in his stories of peoples (Orcs being the principal example) incapable of choosing good over evil.
Actually TaoandZen there were a couple of barmy Jedi’s who went to the UN to petition for an Intergalactic day of Peace only a few weeks back – so there are a few who take that religion seriously!
I am not sure why the phrase irked me as much as it did. Probably because i equate suicide with people so despondent with life they feel no other choice but to end it. It’s utter despair and misery that leads to one killing oneself, whereas Christ died a martyr for his beliefs. He may have known it was coming, or may have been willing to die for his beliefs, but to me that is different to taking your own life.
Cassandra, your email address isn’t working
*blush* Sorry – hadn’t used it for a while and it needed reactivating – please try agani
Cassandra, if you are an omniscient and omnipotent being then your “death” must logically equate, operatively and syntacticaly, with taking your own life. I’m sure no offense is intended by anyone here. Just an observation or critique of the yarn.
I’ve never understood the whole “he died for our sins” bit and whenever I ask nobody’s ever been able to give me a straight answer. Guess that’s one of those whole “blind faith” things.
Unfortunately for your point about there being “no historical record”, the Bible is as valid a historical record as any text before or since. Lots of historical “facts” are based on text only, so why not that a guy called Jesus Christ (be he son of God, prophet or simply a raving loon) was crucified?
Remember, disbelief is just another firm belief. Science has been proven wrong as often as any holy text and no matter how much you argue, nobody knows how the universe was created or what happens to us when we die.
Jesus died for somebody’s sins but not mine
meltin’ in a pot of thieves
wild card up my sleeve
“Lots of historical Ã¢â‚¬Å“factsÃ¢â‚¬Â are based on text only, ” – would you care to explicate that untruth?
Science has been proven wrong as often as any holy text? To my knowledge, science has never been proven wrong. Theories may be superseded, if this is what you mean, but only by replacing them with a theory that better explains the observed phenomena. Supposedly holy texts are so obviously wrong on so many counts that applying any sort of logic will reveal them for what they are: stories made up by human beings of the period in which they were written.
And just why is it that we have to have an answer even for things for which we cannot know the answer? (Though in fact, we know a good deal about the origin of the universe and what happens to us when we die.) Making up a story gets us no closer to the truth.
Cassandra, it seems the only thing you take issue with is the term “suicide,” while apparently buying into the rest of the nonsensical story. I don’t think you really “get” what the comic strip is saying.
ROOdbOOy, the difference between science and religion is this. When a scientific theory is discredited, the scientific community accepts the discreditation (assuming it is valid and has been appropriately peer-reviewed, etc.). They are willing to change when they are proven wrong. When a religious theory is discredited (how in the world could millions of animals have been kept alive on a single ark for so long?), its followers stubbornly cling to the belief with the singular refutation “God did it.” No scientific explanation necessary, just that.
Also, just because science has not explained something TO DATE, doesn’t mean it’s inexplicable. Plenty of things were inexplicable until they were explained by science, and I expect plenty more to come. Again, science is willing to say “I don’t know” until they do know. Religion simply fills in anything it doesn’t understand with “God did it” rather than trying to learn and understand the truth. Just because you don’t know how something happened, doesn’t mean God did it. People used to believe gods caused thunder…
When will atheists understand that christians dont think logically or they wouldnt be christian. you cant convince somebody is wrong when theyve already staken their eternal bla bla bla on it… There are 2 types of people, type 1 who say tell me what to do and what to beleive and ill follow it until i die, and type 2 people who think for themselves. as for the reasons religion exitsts 1. fear of death. 2 lack of scientific knowledge 3. Parents taught it to them 4.Need to “belong” 5. View themselves as too important .(Im sure theres more) Persons are smart people are dumb. Science has much more fulfulling information for us than the bible ever will. the bible hasnt cured anything.
“Lots of historical Ã¢â‚¬Å“factsÃ¢â‚¬Â are based on text only, so why not that a guy called Jesus Christ (be he son of God, prophet or simply a raving loon) was crucified?”
There’s texts and then there are texts… As a historical document, the Bible is problematical: It was written well after ‘the facts’ and by individuals who held a vested interest in the content. It was later translated, edited and assembled by others who also held a vested interest in the content and even the emphasis of that content.
Compared to a contemporary, first person source (which are few and far between and which do not particularly support ‘the facts’ as presented, it is close to worthless.
As a document capturing the culture and mythologies of a tribe on the cusp of cilivilization and (New Testament) the early activities of a religion formed on the edges of colliding civilizations (Levant, Greek, Roman etc.), it’s quite interesting. As a source for literary metaphor, allegory and imagery, it is quite powerful. As history? Not so useful…
OF COURSE HE COMMITTED SUICIDE YOU DOLTS!
Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.
If anyone believes his prediction, then Jesus must have known of his upcoming crucifixion. Jesus fulfilling his own prophecy says nothing about miraculous predictions for such self-fulfilling prophecies tend to carry themselves out. But if he lived as an all powerful being, he would have the power to avert his death. But he chose not to. Instead he consciously committed himself to allow his own death. In another word– suicide. This act of self destruction, especially in light of a horrible disfigured and bleeding torso nailed to a cross hardly gives an exemplary act of the expression of life.
“Science has been proven wrong as often as any holy text”
The process? The positivist, reductionist, methodological approach of Science has been proven false? Ever?? I challenge anyone to cite a case.
“Remember, disbelief is just another firm belief.”
There is a difference between belief based on evidence and a belief in direct contradiction to evidence. Falsely equating the two is a fallacious argument (and often this is deliberate).
Let us explore your assertion of the equivalencies of beliefs:
New evidence comes to light regarding the age of the earth? Excellent! Science will GLADLY revise it’s theory to suit the evidence. Indvidual scientists MAY fail to live up to this expectation and are roundly condemned by the scientific community as a result. It is as it should be.
New evidence comes to light regarding the age of the earth? BLASPHEMY! Religious people (some of them) simply deny the evidence and exercise raw power, misinformation, outright lies and obsfucation to maintain and propogate a ‘belief’ that is demonstratedly FALSE. And rather than being condemned by their community, supposedly ‘reasonable’ Religious people shuffle along muttering ridiculous post-structuralist crap about ‘one belief is as valid as another’, thereby providing the zealots with the cover and representational authority to KEEP DOING THIS!
There is no equation to be made between these two positions.
Not that I have a strong opinion about this or anything Perish the thought…
If r00db00y were a troll, he’d certainly be having a good time now.
And example 29:
If I stand on the railroad tracks when I know a train is coming and it hits me and kills me, is it suicide?
The suicide statement is because catholics believe that god and jesus are one in the same. Also that god is all knowing and has a predetermined plan. Christ is supposed to have been god on earth, therefore if god’s plan was for jesus to die…he killed himself.
Suicide? Cute and intuitive, but how about this: It’s more like crucifying Peter to pay Paul..yuk yuk. Actually that stamement is more true than most may know. Psst! People don’t realize that Paul actually robbed Jesus of the Gospel! They don’t know that xtianity might instead have been known as “Paulist” Christianity, or simply, “Paulism”, a religion of Paul, an early Christian persecutor-turned-leader who proclaimed a Gospel of Christ. Yet herein lies the rub, so to speak: Paul proclaimed a gospel of Jesus -AS- The Christ as opposed to The Gospel proclaimed by Jesus, who was The Christ BECAUSE of His Gospel.
Before Saul’s murderous conscience “blinded” him, *snicker!* 1st decade Christians were Jews who believed in Jesus as the promised Messiah, sent by Jehovah to “Save” THE JEWS from the bondage of Rome. The Gospel they proclaimed was the Gospel that Jesus preached through his post baptist ministry, not a “gospel” ABOUT Jesus as Proclaimed by the newly converted Paul. Sorry Ya’ll , I just felt like raving a bit. BTW I’m not a theologian, just a post-Katrina queer trying to survive in The Chocolate City. If you have anything personal to say, email me mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org and leave the nice athiests here alone. Nope , not an Xtian, either, besides if you are reasonably intelligent and actually read your bible with rationality, you’ll understand what I said here. Peace. Gloria In Excelsis Paolus , anyone?? *snort!*
“Actually, Iâ€™d be a lot less assertively atheist if LOTR was the sacred text of the predominant religion. Itâ€™s far better literature than the bible and has far better moral standards (which isnâ€™t hard to achieve, admittedly.) For historical accuracy itâ€™s a draw.”
Why go and think the “predominant” religion has to be the only one that matters — and other, *non*-predominant religions don’t — so if the predominant one is “bad” then you have to go bust, to hard atheism, instead of to one of those other religions? That makes no sense.
And do “far better moral standards” also include restrictions on sex? As that is important, like it or not. (remember, it is as poweful as the sword — just in the opposite direction: it begins life, while the sword ends it. Due to that, it deserves laws and rules to regulate it and sure it is used properly. IT also has all sorts of other ramifcations, too.)
cassandra. If suicide to you equals an act prompted by a feeling of misery and despair then why not think of Christ’s act as being like a Kami-kaze pilot or a suicide bomber.
I am for a more Gandhian approach to religion. So quoting the scriptures by the letter is always misleading. Another advice is not to search “God” only in one book but everywhere.
Well as he could have simply not dies, it was basically suicide/suicide by cop.
Also for the whole of christian theology to work Jesus had to die for mankind’s sins. However if he hadnt been martyred what would have happened? would we all be screwed?
Basically Judas gets shafted for doing what had to be done.
here is a very simple sketch showing the exact and obvious flaw in the thought of thinking he was martyred.
To me, suicide = taking action to end your own life. The circumstances are pretty much irrelevant. If you throw yourself in front of a bus to save your three-year-old child, that’s suicide, regardless of whether or not you wanted to die.
NOTE: This comments section is provided as a safe place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.
NAME — Get an avatar
EMAIL — Required / not published
Jesus & Mo is licensed under a Creative Commons License:
Feel free to copy for noncommercial purposes, under the same license.
Please provide a link back to jesusandmo.net
Hosted by NearlyFreeSpeech.NET.