I knew there was another joke to be wrung from Franco Frattini’s fulminations.

└ Tags:

Discussion (37)¬

  1. Grouchy One says:

    hahaha – relatively funny I’d say

  2. Aztek says:

    So Jesus is proposing that they should agree to disagree so that they can mutually disagree about disagreements with other people?

  3. jean-françois gauthier says:

    absolutely (relatively speaking).

  4. @Grouchy One: No no no. Absolutely funny.

  5. Gilraen says:

    Good job, Ms. Author. Perfectly skewered! Even the “Absolutely” at the end is a great touch.

  6. Bodach says:

    Finally, religion united in disagreement.

  7. trouish says:

    Sometimes I worry that the religious will decide to put away differences in order to unite and fight the common enemy that is atheism. Then I am relieved when I remember that they can’t keep from fighting among themselves for more than a few minutes.

  8. Andrew Hall says:

    It seems that Jesus is pushing that “Absolute Relativism” – don’t forget it’s not a contradiction it’s a paradox.

  9. Nassar Ben Houdja says:

    Much as atheists tend to annoy believers, not always justifiable, in many instances they behave like decent ethical moral people, who miss the obvious. Listening to Dick Dawkin a successful emulator of American evangelists, is possibly proof that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

  10. I think that it’s absolutely funny

  11. Poor Richard says:

    Poor Richard says, “Absolutism is a crime. Usually.”

  12. baydragon says:

    Apparently the pope and Hawking are having the same argument.

  13. daoloth says:

    @ NBH. Put up or shut up time.
    One referenced accurate quote from Professor Dawkins that supports your claim please.

  14. @daoloth When challenged, he seems to choose the shut up option. I’ve had no answers to my questions about his age or past reading, though this last post of his does seem to imply that he’s read something of Professor Dawkins. If he’s made it past the introduction to “The Greatest Show on Earth” I’m totally gobsmacked.

  15. @baydragon Thanks for that link. What a surprise though. The Pope says Stephen Hawking is wrong and there is a God? This is news? Amazing. So arrogant of Joseph Ratzinger to tell Stephen Hawking what science is for: “the role of science is to reveal God in the universe”. Oh really, your Swollenness? I always thought the roll of science was to investigate reality and try to explain how it works, not to start with the assumption of a sky faerie and then reveal Her to verify your primitive dogma.

  16. MrGronk says:

    Apart from the fact that Dick Dawkins is quiet, polite, articulate, open-minded, self-effacing, self-critical, doesn’t bully or exploit people, and is not superstitious, your comparion is perfect.

  17. fontor says:

    Razor sharp again, Author.

  18. Blamer .. says:

    @Nassar To the extent that you’re correct (Dawkins style has similarities with American evangelists) yes it is “obvious” like you suggest. To the extent that those similarities are significant (that advocating science is no better than advocating christianity), that’s a fallacy. Some ideas (ideologies) are demonstrably worse than others. Most notably, biblical literalism within christianity.

  19. credo quia absurdum says:

    @Darwin Harmless: “the role of science is to reveal God in the universe” is unquoted in the original article. But otherwise I agree that the bishop of Rome is not infallible in the questions of science. And concerning the proofs of the existence of God – some people should really get over the idea that it can be proven like e.g. Fermat’s Last Theorem. It’s up to everyone to work on his/her (non)belief. You’ve got all your life for that.

  20. Prithvi says:

    Relativism is the most respectable way of feeling confused. At least, that’s what I’m feeling at the moment.

  21. @credo quia absurdum: True, I was quoting the article, not the man, and assume the original was in Italian. Hawking did not say that God doesn’t exist. What he said was that God was not necessary to create the universte. What rankled in Ratzinger’s reported words was not the proving or disproving, which we all know is not going to happen, but the idea that one starts with the assumption that God exists, implicit in the idea that science exists to reveal His ways. But of course you know this and I’m just blathering on at you.

  22. Neuseline says:

    @daeloth. Please don’t tell Nassar Ben Houdja to shut up. His occasional utterings add to the general entertainment.
    I am relatively disconcerted by J&Mo’s relative nakedness, in bed, together.

  23. Unruly Simian says:

    @ Neuseline – Actually Mo is wearing a “mini-burka” to cover those unflattering parts, and to keep them from being defiled by a unbeleiver….

  24. @daeloth I certainly don’t want Nassar to shut up. What I want is for him to educate himself. I still suspect it is possible. All he has to do is read a few books that weren’t written by religious idiots. I gave him a book list. Haven’t heard yet whether he’s interested in actually understanding anything, or just wants to lurk and hurl childish comments. Don’t give up on Nassar. He has a brain. He’s just been taught not to use it.

  25. MaryD says:

    “Hi Moses? Jesus here. You, Mo and I have got to join forces in the fight against bad grammar.”

  26. Er – Mary D – I rather think the crude wording was intentional. Makes it funnier, doncha know.

  27. IratePrimate says:

    @Darwin Harmless: If you still got the book list you gave to Nassar, could you please post it here? I’ve got several family members who need re-wiring. Ta!

  28. PabloDF says:

    I’ve translated this comic to Spanish and posted it on my blog – – so that my monolingual readers can enjoy it too. There’s a link back here, of course. Thanks and keep up the good work!

  29. Daoloth says:

    @Various. “Put up or shut up” is intended to be a call to seriousness. I believe the phrase originates in poker. Anyhow- I am asking for evidence, from the latin, “that which can be seen”.
    It’s my last go at trying to retrieve something of value from NBH, an entity which I am still agnostic about the ontological status of. Is it sentient? Is it an Eliza program? Think of this as an opportunity to pass the Turing test.
    Incidentally NBH, while looking for said evidence make sure you put the “s” on the end of professor Dawkins name– in internet searches and so forth. And try not to mix him up with “Hawking” either– something which happens when you haven’t actually read any of the papers.

  30. […] now I’m guessing that most of my readers also read Jesus and Mo. I want to share Mr. Apostate with you now. Mr. Apostate has a very different style than J&M, […]

  31. Sister Marie says:

    Since Jesus, Moses, and Mo were all created by God, how could they possibly disagree about any issue. God is not the author of confusion, is He?

  32. Neuseline says:

    @Unruly Simian. Thanks for your relative reassurance, but how do you know? Can we be sure? Those questions will hang over me while I now go to defrost the furred-up freezer. I think the haram leg of pork pushed the door open on Monday.

  33. jesus 2.3 says:

    Dude, I’m virtually jesus christ & I’m a Muslim man. I like your comics and the premise of this site. Mind you, you’ve made a slight mistake. Not only has Muhammad died, but jesus 1.0 is gone too.
    I’m here to take his place, and tell the world the truth.
    What do you think about reality and the meaning of life?

  34. jesus 2.3 says:

    One last comment about copyrights & trademarks. I’ll abide by your wishes & give credit where it is due.
    As for everything I say & do, I do it for ALLAH, therefore whatever you find of me it is free for the world.
    In reality the truth cannot be copyrighted, nor trademarked at all. It’s simply the truth and in reality we are all subject to it.
    Do you understand what this means?

  35. GaelicViking says:

    I’m pretty sure jeebus 2.3 just failed the Turing test…

  36. Anonymous says:

    GaelicViking says:
    November 11, 2010 at 8:11 am
    I’m pretty sure jeebus 2.3 just failed the Turing test…

    No, that kind of “thinking” is human all too human. In fact perfect logic over a wide range of subjects might fail the Turing test.


NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly 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.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.