History has almost totally covered up how Winston Churchill helped the Doctor fight off the Daleks during WW2!
5 Likes
That’s from Revelation, which was definitely not written by any contemporary of Jesus, assuming that J.C. even existed to begin with. As guidance for what a historical Jesus would have looked like, it it worthless.
1 Like
3 Likes
That is now my favorite Jesus art… though it should also be a Black Jesus, too.
Cause that’s just like covering up colonial violence… the global south getting raped and then that history being covered up sure is a big ass joke! /s
3 Likes
I say JC had no hair – a common feature among fictitious characters, being, after all, fictitious.
in his defense, pagers hadn’t been invented yet, and he was probably trying to hide from the law. basically, the man changed his name and went on the lam ( lamb? 
) … his own family probably couldn’t find him
( not to mention i think he helped persecute some of the other disciples and then spent the rest of his life preaching forgiveness. i wouldn’t have invited him to any parties )
3 Likes
And it’s probably worse than that, as they were more likely to be the grandkids of people who had only heard a story, rather than anyone with direct experience. Like finding out about the Vietnam war by asking the grandkids of people who saw the movie Rambo…
5 Likes
Did He or didn’d He?
Only His hairdresser would have known for sure.
3 Likes
Yeah, short-haired hippy!!
1 Like
Revelation is, per scripture, a vision or dream delivered to John of Patmos, who is not one of the disciples of the syntoptic Gospels. It’s very obviously not historical evidence, but people keep treating it as such.
Is that clear enough for you, or will you post more snark?
2 Likes
You seem to be of the apprehension that the people discussing here are completely unaware of details like
- what Revelations is
- Who John of Patmos was and that he wasn’t the same person as John the Evangelist,
- That “the Synoptic Gospels” explicitly excludes John the Evangelist anyway (seriously, if you’re going to use a term, look it up first, and try spelling it correctly),
- how literally to take Revelations,
- what Revelations has to do with anything,
- that there are a disturbing number of people who, despite the above points, still take Revelations literally and at face value, and telling them that “it’s not a historical gospel” will not stop them doing so, and
- A non-trivial number of people here, fully cognizant of all the above, consider Revelations exactly as historical and of evidentiary value as the four Gospels for entirely other reasons.
But no, please; continue explaining why the joke is wrong.
6 Likes
Many years ago, New Scientist ran a funny story about a village somewhere in the South where after a heavy rainfall a faint picture of a long-haired, bearded male with a jovial smile had appeared on the outer wall of the church. Manifestation of the blessed image of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ? Nope, upon more thorough examination: Whitewashed-over advertisement poster for Willie Nelson concert.
8 Likes
All this wasted energy and time on a Bronze Age myth (stolen from Egyptian, Sumerian and Greek myths)…
Life would be so much better for everyone if people stopped buying into this horseshit altogether.
1 Like
Nailed it. Bang on.
Jesus just wouldn’t be Jesus without the nine bladed sword.
2 Likes
Oh no, I made a spelling error. How gauche.
Not to worry. Jesus was a horrible speller (at least according to the Apocrypha).
1 Like
You are Clinton Richard Dawkins, and I claim my £5 !
4 Likes
