Random Comic
yours

yours

Flattr this for Jesus


Discussion (32)¬

  1. spoing says:

    Seems that Mr God takes offence at quite a lot of things that he created in the first place … and every now and again he throws a bit of a tanty and does them all in …. recall that nasty Noah flood business….

    Ironically according to infallible scripture, it was Noah himself whose pervy son couldn’t help but indulge himself in a little daddy-sex, and so the pair should have been executed like the weenie-hiding poofters they both were.

    “And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.” (Gen 9:24) According to God’s Law on Homosexual Acts, ” If a man has sex with another man, kill them both. ” (Lev 20:13)

    SPOING!!!!

  2. Scott says:

    Well that’s one mighty out of context message there spoing! It was actually that the son saw the father’s nakedness rather then “a little daddy-sex”

    I suppose scripture would not count as evidence?? Jesus should have said “it is written”

  3. Comment? says:

    No comment.

  4. spoing says:

    @scott …

    “22And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness. 24And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. ”

    Well, he’d obviously done SOMETHING hadn’t he?

    ‘to know’ or ‘to see’ is well-known metaphorical biblical parlance for slipping the old sausage in.

  5. BaldApe says:

    See this.

    I have always wondered why it was such a big deal for someone to see his father without clothes, but it turns out that is a euphemism for having sex with the father’s wife or concubine.

  6. dyl says:

    i’m not sure what to think but spoing isn’t alone here…
    “It is very clear that this phrase was used by the Hebrews to descibe the sin of incest. Many societies and cultures adopt various terms to…”
    http://www.ukapologetics.net/canaan.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest_in_the_Bible

  7. Postman says:

    Touche’, Author… touche’.

  8. John Moore says:

    Nothing like passed-out drunken gay man love with your father. I mean I never told my dad……but all he drank was whiskey. Does that make it more or less a sin?

  9. Gustaf Sjoblom says:

    This is probably my favorite Jesus and Mo strip so far.

  10. Satantiago says:

    these days what people do with their genitals is government’s business, thus “hate laws”, radical feminism, and children’s books starred by homosexual characters

  11. Satantiago says:

    according to ukapologetics Ham didn’t actually screw his father but his mother…. “The text presumes husband and wife to be one (…) Ham was trying to usurp his father’s authority by sleeping with his mother” …the Bible can’t be more confusing.

  12. John Moore says:

    Of course the bars name only adds a layer of irony…..spoing!

  13. zoidberg says:

    I second that Gustaf Sjoblom – Best J&M yet! :)

  14. spoing says:

    @Satantiago … seems to me that UKapologetics protesteth a little too much.
    Perhaps Xtians find the prospect of daddy Noah getting a nice bit of Ham just a tad difficult to build into the Sunday School curriculum? Whereas getting a bit of hot MILF action with Noah’s wife is somehow more palatable.

    As usual the perfect infallible word of god makes good sense when you know how to interpret it …

  15. Mr Gronk says:

    Didn’t Christ say “get thee behind me, Satan” to Beelzebub himself? But of course he had been alone in the desert for 40 days …

  16. John The Geologist says:

    I agree with Spoing.

    I can’t help thinking that if his son had given him one up the bum while he was sleeping Noah would have certainly known about it when he woke up.

    Not been there personally but I can’t help thinking you might have a rough idea if someone had popped it up your jacksie.

    .

  17. Author,

    Your standards have once again set the bar higher. I envy your brain.

  18. Dídac says:

    Very interesting the discussion about Ham’s curse. However, Leviticus’ rules do not apply to Noah unless we take Mosaic law as retroactive. And we must no forget that as true as God Hates Fags is God Hates Shrimps. Law is law, and there is no place to cherry picking. (For another theologically relevant three-word sentence, see Cthulhu Eates Chordates)

  19. Hahahaha – I know where the lines in that last panel come from.

  20. ron says:

    you should get Jesus & Mo to introduce us to their friend Yid… that would really get things going!

  21. Stephen Turner says:

    All these references to Ham make me think of Ken Ham. Stop it!
    (He’s the director of the Creation “Museum” and of “Answers” in Genesis.)

    Re: Get thee behind me, Satan. Remember that Satan is an anagram of Santa, and Santa gets little kids to sit on his knee.
    Makes you think, eh?

  22. spoing says:

    Ah, the irony, the irony of that last panel!

    And to think that this entire theology of intolerance is based on a handful of verses extracted from The Hypocrites Guide to the Galaxy.

  23. Mr Gronk says:

    John the Geologist: You forget that Lot managed to stay asleep while both his daughters did the unspeakable to him – must have been a teenage fad back then
    (yuck).

  24. spoing says:

    Good ol’ God-fearin’, daughter f***in’, child-pimpin’ Lot.

    Ah but Mr Gronk, it was all for the good of the species. The all-merciful YHWH had just dished out his righteous justice upon Sodom and Gomorrah, from which Lot and his girls made a narrow escape … what better for a bit of stress relief than a roll in the hay with dear old dad, on the pretext of saving the human race … ?

    http://www.biblestudy.org/question/was-lot-alcoholic.html

    Note also that these were the very same girls Lot had earlier cheerfully offered to the Sodomites to spare his own godly butthole and those of his guests the indignities uncle Noah suffered!

    ” 5And they [the Sodomites] called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. 6And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, 7And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. 8Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.”

  25. JohnnieCanuck says:

    So who here is so versed in its history that they can explain to me why all these embarrassing parts in the Bible weren’t deleted or completely revised into respectability?

    As a case in point it seems King David should be a counter example, that of a man corrupted by power, yet perversely he seems to be a protagonist, a winner and much admired then and down through the ages.

    It probably isn’t obvious from the above, but I only just learned of the secretive Christian organisation calling itself The Family which is embroiled in multiple US political scandals. They justify theirs and King David’s asocial behaviour as being permitted to those chosen by God. The sign by which the chosen are identified is their power over others.

    Because they have convinced themselves they are favoured by God, they grant themselves exemption from the moral standards applied to lesser mortals.

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/08/a_book_to_give_us_all_nightmar.php

  26. Stuart says:

    Satan certainly is an anagram of Santa……thus the old joke about the dyslexic devil worshipper who sold his soul to Santa

  27. Definitely one of my favourites. Can’t believe I’ve not commented on this one before.

    TRiG.

  28. Pappy mcfae says:

    I’m loving this! A friend pointed me here. I think that Jesus and Mo should kiss at least once. Think how many knickers that would put in a twist???!!!

  29. Dilige et quod vis fac says:

    Good one, author, two thumbs up!

  30. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Dilige et quod vis fac says:
    April 6, 2010 at 12:57 pm
    Good one, author, two thumbs up

    I think you’ll find that’s a sin too!

  31. ottebrain says:

    surely if it offends god he’s got to be there, and that just is disgusting…

Comment¬

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.