Seal Of Approval
Life With And Without A Cat
The Cutest Dog GIF Ever
The Best Laugh Ever
Toddler Tells Her Dad Who’s The Boss
Goats Being Weird
“Game Of Thrones” In Banner Form
What We Love This Week, Volume XV
The Milky Way As Seen From Florida
The Best Viral Pictures Of The Week, Volume 11
The Best Of The Hilarious Shibe Meme
The Best Viral Pictures of the Week, Volume 10
Michele Bachmann Urges Spiritual Warfare To Enforce Agenda
Defining The Real “Value” Of Our Teachers
The Most Hilarious Obama GIFs On The Web
Real Jesus Versus Republican Jesus
The Real Jesus Is In Hiding
2012: Free Versus Slave States, Not Red Versus Blue
A Bank Robbery Versus A Bailout
If Jesus walked the earth the first thing Republicans would do is to kill Him.
You are misguided.
I usually like your humor – but do not understand your version of “Republican”.
Most Republicans I know don’t fit your deformed view.
The noisey Republicans….the ones we see and hear…are exactly like that!
“I am the state” is a Louis XIV quote, not “Jeezus.”
L’État c’est moi
“Jeezus” is made up for comic purposes. This all falls well inside the mindset of the GOP base. GW (i.e. “Unrepentent Dick”) believed he was the sun-king. Too bad that delusion of executive absolutism lingers for the next occupant
Jazuz, or Dublin Jesus, doesn’t care what you do as long as no one unwilling is involved. You want some drugs? Sure buddy, just do it over there will ye. Ye wanna have sex? Not right now I’m not in the mood. Oh you mean you wanna have sex with that guy! Sure, he seems happy enough about it. I’m going for a pint.
Nice comic. For another funny site click my name.
Hahaha. This is pretty clever, but the bible quotes for the “real” Jesus aren’t really addressing those issues in context.
For sexuality, he was making a comparison. He’s saying the prostitute was still a sinner and her actions were still wrong, but it would be hypocritical of people to condemn her since we are all sinners. He’s not condoning sleeping around.
For alcohol and drugs, I think it’s pretty obvious this isn’t meant to be taken literally. If it was, it would contradict lots of other things such as gluttony being a sin. It’s just highlighting the fact that words do more harm than usually perceived.
For war, that’s not even talking about morality. It’s warning you that no matter how good you think you are at fighting others, that lifestyle will also lead to death by “the sword”, or a fight with someone else. It has nothing to do with whether or not fighting is right or wrong in certain situations.
For separation of church and state, again, that’s not even close to what this referring to. Jesus said that in response to someone saying that Caesar is wrong to tax people so much. He’s saying don’t worry about taxes, all you need is god.
For money, he’s not condemning the rich, he’s saying that focussing too much money can lead you away from your morals. Also, that translation is incorrect. I don’t remember in which language, but somewhere along the way from translating from language to language they messed up the word camel. In one of the languages, the words camel and yarn are both the same word. The obvious choice is yarn. Everyone knows how annoying it is to string yarn through a needle.
The moral here is it is way too easy to take bible quotations out of context and apply them to whatever you want.
Alas for you, you have lied. In fact, all the words of Jesus in the bible are not meant to be taken factually but are parables, meant to be interpreted and understood.
All you have done is attempted to twist literal interpretations into your world view which you obviously attempt to force upon your religion to justify your abuses of it.
Your equalling of gluttony to complete abstinence under the threat of punishment, it’s hard to imagine a more extreme stretching language.
Your lie that being greedy is OK, it is just bad to be greedy to a point where it excludes everything else, including spending time ‘pretending’ to be religious.
As for completely ignoring the ten commandments when it comes to killing people, WTF.
Your a number one American Republican, bible in one hand, automatic weapon in the other, demanding to be able to exploit the poor when you already are tens of thousands of times richer than they are. The true narcissist of democracy demanding that everyone votes they way you vote or they should be denied a vote and, demanding everyone agrees with you or shuts up.
Let me recount the ways this reply sucks.
Begin with a great point.
Follow up with an ad hominem attack.
Your point on gluttony was a straw man argument. He pointed out a contradiction in the bible itself, and then you proceeded to draw up something that hadn’t even been discussed.
Money =/= Wealth.
Rich =/= Greedy.
Diversity = War.
And last but not least, an ad hominem attack.
*You* need to think with your brain and not with your wallet.
*You* make both liberals and atheists look like ignorant idiots.
*You* disgrace us all.
There really was something called the eye of the needle that was a gate into Jerusalem. This gate was tall and extremely narrow. To get into the city through this particular gate, the people had to get off their camels outside the gate as the camels would not fit through the gate.
Don’t see how the “Republican” part fits, unless your only definition comes from other lazy comedians. I’m an atheist, myself.
This demonstrates yet again that the most intolerant, most prejudice, most hateful people in the country are liberals.
Do you realize how Ironic that statement is?
Do you realize how true it is?
It seems more like you’re comparing the teachings of Jesus to the teachings of the Westboro Baptist Church, what does this have to do with the Republican party? I’m no Republican, but why are Liberals seemingly always so ignorant, and malicious?
Have you watched Fox News lately? It’s not left or right- its just politicians in general.
Because we Liberals totally have the monopoly on being ignorant and/or malicious? I think it’s fair to say two things here:
1. It’s political satire.Iif you can’t laugh at it as being something totally wrong or totally right, then don’t read it.
2. Politics in general have the ability to bring out the worst in people. The fact that you are labeling ALL Liberals as malicious and ignorant makes it clear that you are being just as ignorant, and potentially just as malicious. Why is that okay?
I consider myself liberal, but I feel that this is kinda cliche’ man. The bible speaks out pretty clearly about homosexuality, which homosexuality and the act of judgement are scriptually, two different sins. I mean, that is why he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.
Ehh, Sodom and Gomorrah had more to do with the idea that the men who wanted to have sex with the guests were attempting to exert control over God, rather than follow his rules. The ‘sex’ part is a mix of minor mistranslations and a broad interpretation of Hebrew.
You forgot he would also have been black.
Actually, Jesus would have been a Middle Eastern Jew. Not African. Duh.
Brilliant. I wish Jeezus’s font was more readable is my only complaint.
This comic was obviously not trying to quote texts from the Bible in their proper context- they were purposely altered a little for effect. I get it, even though it is a little wacky.
I do agree to a point with some of the ideas it brings up. I was raised a Republican, ultra-conservative Christian, so I can relate to scripture quotations. But in the last 10+ years I have changed a lot of my religious and political thinking.
I think a lot of Jesus’ teachings are polar opposites from the far-right political leanings of most conservative Christian groups. The quote about it being easier for a camel (or yarn) to go thru the eye of a needle is one good example. Another is the statement “the love of money is the root of all evil.” When the rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked what he could do to get into the kingdom of heaven, Jesus told him to sell all he had and give the money to the poor. All of those scriptures point away from the example of the super-wealthy fat cats in the Republican party that nearly all conservative Christian groups uphold.
The early Christians who gathered after Jesus’ return to heaven sold all their property and belongings and laid the money at the apostles’ feet to be distributed among the poor. That almost sounds like (dare I say it?) -socialism. Or maybe they were even forming a commune?
I’m definitely not a fan of the “Republican” Jesus, but both of these Jesus are made up of people taking one verse from the bible and interpreting it. They are both inaccurate.
wow… all these verses were taken completely out of context… smh liberals smh
To all those complaining of how liberals can be malicious and mean, it’s not easy being told I can’t see my boyfriend in hospital because some asshole republican blocked marriage in my state.
My family’s church leader explained gay marriage as some kind of conspiracy to sue churches everywhere. We don’t want freaking God in our relationship, we just want to be able to see our partners when they get hurt, to not have our disapproving families swoop in when one of us dies to take everything we have and shared in a legal case. We just want to be left alone.
Also, you’re quoting the old testament there regarding Sodom and Gamorrah. He didn’t destroy those cities because there was faggotry going on, he destroyed them because they raped and murdered people who visited them. Funny how you guys think being gay is worse than being a rapist or a murderer.
The real church, filled with followers of the true Jesus, does not believe in war or in total abstinance from alcohol. They do, however, believe every life is precious, including those of babies. Yet, God is a God of mercy, and if the life of the mother is at stake because of the unborn child, it is my sincere belief that abortion is permitted. Afterall, the mother also may likely care for other children and may likely be able to have children later. Who is to decide which child is more important? I am a conservative Christian, but I think the average opinion on abortion by most conservative Christians is extreme. The decision in these life/ death situations should be left to the parents, and they should never be judged on it by another person.
No offence, but saying that the ‘real church’ does not believe in war is a total cop out. Every war, without fail, has a basis in religion or religious conflict. The church may not be directly involved but they are indirectly. And I don’t think that this cartoon was saying that there should be total abstinence from alcohol, but more other drugs. I like that you are at least a little open minded.
That was awesome.
so funny cause its true
Both of these columns are pure fantasy. Read the gospels and get a true picture of the historical Jesus. Read 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, 3 John, James and Jude to find out what his closest associates thought. Read the gospels and Acts to find out what his enemies thought. Read the apostle Paul to see what his earliest followers thought. But don’t go by sarcastic, straw men pictures like these two gross depictions of Jesus.
YEAH! TOTALLY!!!11!!! THOSE STUPID RETHUGLICANS, SCREW THEM MAN!! VOTE FOR ME!
You people make me sick. Is there nothing sacred to you? You build a straw man out of Jesus and then pretend to know how the right thinks while you put words in their mouths. Bunch of communist assholes.
How is this communistic you idiotic fool? You know, you can’t just accuse someone of being communist when you don’t like what they say. If that were the case, then you would be a communist in my opinion. Communist asshole.
Not all Republicans are Jesus nuts just as not all Democrats are douchebags, although the writer seems to fit that description. It is possible to be a conservative republican without being religious, you could just be smart and like personal*/economic freedom. You could also be liberal democratic without being douchebaggy, you could just like big government and feel entitled to things you don’t deserve.
*I say personal freedom because I, a conservative republican, accept gay marriage, abortion, alcohol and some drugs. Most of the conservative republicans accept it too, we might not choose it for ourselves but don’t want to take the opportunity from others and I have hope that the more conservative republicans will begin to accept it too. Also, I love guns and like that I can have so many.
Luke 1:15 states that John the Baptist will be “filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb”, which means that the baby in the womb has a soul for the Holy Spirit to fill.
This was a pretty horrible misrepresentation of the Biblical verses most of which were taken completely out of context and thus divorced of their meaning to fit a political agenda. Most Republicans I know don’t force religion to fit their worldview rather their worldview conforms to their religion.
Christ did not tell the Pharisees to not stone the adulteress because he condoned sexual immorality but rather he was sending a message to the law-obsessed religious leaders of the time that it was not they that earned their way into heaven but rather only through his mercy and grace could anyone achieve salvation. He forgave the woman of her sins because she sought it not because he dismissed the sin.
The verse on ingesting things is in reference to banned foods. Prior to Christ Jews were not to eat pork as a way of setting them apart from the rest of the world so that people would know that they were God’s special people. When Christ came he came for both the Jew and the Gentile and so, since the Gentile was able to eat things like pork and other banned foods it was an important issue for the disciples of Christ to determine if the dietary restrictions were still essential to ones salvation. This is how they came down on that issue.
Sure Christ never mentioned abortion specifically, probably because he thought the “Thou shalt not kill” commandment covered that pretty thoroughly.
The war one I’m not really going to delve into because Christ came for men’s souls not to be a military leader and because I can’t say I’ve ever heard a Republican say we should fight because God told us too.
The final two I’m pretty on board with and cringe when I see Christians attempting to moderate public morality through governmental mechanisms rather than through the far more effective method of love and outreach and ministry. I also dislike televangelists with a seething passion. Were Christ around I imagine he would have done much the same as he did when he chased the moneylenders from his Holy temple.
Real classy. Not. I hate it how everyone is misrepresenting Jesus and Christianity these days. Hell, most of those dumbasses wouldn’t know Jesus if He saved them from damnation personally!
If Jesus did save you personally, you wouldn’t believe it anyway, so why do you say that? Supposedly Jesus is returning, but if someone walked into a Church saying that he was Jesus, no-one would believe him. Hypocrites.
To Anonymous — though this poster is less-than-perfect, it’s not the total debasement that you are trying to claim it is.
You are right, Jesus wasn’t condoning the adultery of the woman caught in adultery. But he *does* caution not just at that point in the New Testament but in *numerous* places in the New Testament about attacking people for their slights. Therefore, there is no way to condone allowing people to commit hate crimes in a Christian society. Period.
As for the issue of same-sex marriage — well yes, there *are* different interpretations on what the Christian teaching on marriage is — and I mean different interpretations that are given in good-faith without blatant distortions of Christ’s teachings (like the distortions made by those who oppose hate-crimes protections). However, all these different interpretations in Christian teachings on marriage (that is, those that don’t distort Christ’s teaching) apply to the RELIGIOUS institution of marriage — not the CIVIL institution of marriage.
As for Christian teachings on the CIVIL institution of marriage — just look four rows down on the table and you will see that Jesus teaches “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar and unto God what is God’s”.
It isn’t the government’s job to enforce the Christian teaching on marriage on anyone — and that would be true even if there were agreement on exactly how that teaching is to be interpreted. And it *certainly* isn’t the government’s job to take *sides* on how these teachings are to be interpreted. The government’s responsibility is equal protection under the law —- which means that if *anyone* is allowed access to marry those of the gender they’re actually attracted to under CIVIL law, then EVERYONE has to have that right.
This doesn’t mean that the government has to allow same-sex marriage. The government has one other option that *also* would fulfill equal protection under the law —– and that option is to not have at *all* a CIVIL institution of marriage — and decide that the RELIGIOUS institution of marriage is the only marriage that exists in our society. That means, the government will be hands-off on this, and different denominations will sort out by their own laws what marriages may be performed — and which ones performed elsewhere are to be recognized. For example, in that scenario, nobody can force a traditional Jewish synagogue to recognize any marriage between a Jew and a Gentile —- even if the two are of opposite sex. (As under Jewish law, marriage between a Jew and a Gentile isn’t just illicit – it’s downright invalid.)
Granted, this doesn’t necessarily apply to the RELIGIOUS institution of marriage —- that’s something that different denominations will have to sort out for themselves until there comes a consensus among Christians on exactly how that is to be interpreted —- and even then, whatever that consensus is, it still can’t be imposed on non-Christians.
I could go on and on and on tearing your post apart bit by bit — but I really don’t have the time to do so. In short, yes, the poster above is definitely an over-simplification. But is it a distortion and co-opting of Christ’s teachings as you seem to insinuate? Not in the least bit!!!
Why does real Jesus look so angry?