Quantcast

«

»

Oct 26 2011

Dawkins Flatters Jesus

No self-esteem deficiencies
For Dawkins, I can see:
“A man as smart as Jesus Christ
Would clearly think like me”

hmmm…

If Jesus was as smart as that,
He knew he was a faker—
A man as smart as Jesus was,
Today, would be Jim Bakker.

If Jesus heard the voice of god,
The man was not at all well
A man as crazed as Jesus was
Today, is Jerry Falwell.

If Jesus cleared the marketplace
He clearly had some stones
As power-mad as Jesus was
Today, he’d be Jim Jones

When Jesus led his followers,
His “church” was more a cult
Two thousand years of shepherding
And what is the result?

Two thousand years since Jesus led
His tiny little sect
And even Richard Dawkins treats
Lord Jesus with respect

Blasphemous rant after the jump:

Seriously… I wonder which would be the greater insult–Dawkins claiming that Jesus would be an atheist if he were around today (which at least assumes he was an intelligent man) or a slightly different view, which notes that Big J was a cult leader in his day, and compares him to more contemporary figures who want to use religion to control your life?

When I cast about me for someone who is unhinged enough to curse a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season, I don’t think atheist, I think Charles Manson.

Two thousand years is an awful long time for a PR campaign to do its work. Christianity has grown from a small sect to a dominant force, but its roots are cult. “Leave everything and follow me” sounds so sweet across the centuries, but it’s just a small step from “because I see a flying saucer in the tail of that comet. So let’s shed our earthly husks and prepare for heaven…”

Take away the respectability that two thousand years of polishing can give you, and what would Jesus be if he were here today? Same as he was then; the leader of a splinter cult, crazy and charismatic, alternating cries for peace on earth with demands for fealty.

Sorry, Dawkins, but you were far too kind.

6 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Shplane, Spess Alium

    This.

    Far too many otherwise rational people don’t realize just how disgusting of a person the Biblical Jesus was, and how disgusting of a person any “Real” Jesus almost certainly would have been had he existed.

  2. 2
    sumdum

    The fire brand of atheism too kind to Jesus. I never thought I’d see the day..

  3. 3
    Sajanas

    One my favorite parts of Why I am not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq, was where he expressed his surprise that so many atheists used the story of Jesus and the Fig Tree as why they didn’t think he was a good person, when Mohammad ordered the execution of hundreds, married a 6 year old and raped her at 9, and other sorts of stuff that are far worse in the scheme of things than withering a tree. Yet at the same time, I think it speaks volumes about a person that would feel the need to invent a Hell for his enemies, and heap so much scorn on those who disagreed with him. I think Jesus merely lacked the opportunity to be terrible.

  4. 4
    Leo Buzalsky

    @2 Did you not read “The God Delusion.” I think Dawkins talked about being generally supportive – or maybe not against it nearly as much as the Old Testament – of the New Testament except for the idea of original sin. I thought he even gave mention to an “Atheists for Jesus” group. (Dawkins being Dawkins probably doesn’t think much – by which I mean he doesn’t notice – the misogynistic parts. Had to be said!)

    @3 Yeah, agreed. It seems Mohammad, from my understanding, was out to gain a lot of political power on top of being a cult leader. Different goals require different tactics.

  5. 5
    sumdum

    Yes I read the god dillusion. And its well known description of god, in human terms.

  6. 6
    Hazuki

    Nice to see someone admitting this. “Doomsaying apocalyptic prophet” was practically a job description in those days. Jesus was more like Harold Camping than Mahatma Gandhi, too.

    And he made a false prediction; several, in fact. Remember what Deuteronomy 18 says we should do with false prophets?

    Sure, sure, the apologists attempt to scuttlebutt around this by bafflegabbing on about spiritual versus physical warfare, but the text itself is against them: one can see changing trends in beliefs on the matter from, for example, 1 Cor. through 1 and 2 Thess. and culminating in 2 Peter (itself pseudepigraphical). The people were expecting a literal end of the world.

    Now, where are those stones? We are supposed to stone Camping. With stones. That he die.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite="" class=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>