Friday, April 17, 2009

Jesus & the Pigs: A Sociopathic Pig Hater, or Just a Weak God? You make the call.

Mathew 8:28-34 gives an account of Jesus purging demons from two men who were possessed. The demons beg Jesus not to send them into the abyss, but instead to allow them to infest a herd of pigs. Jesus agrees. The demons leave the men, go into the pigs, which then promptly run amok, throw themselves over a cliff into a lake and die.

In discussing this weird tale with a fundie, he said it wasn't Jesus who was at fault for the loss of the pigs, “technically it was the demons fault for asking”. Now there’s an example of twisted apologetics. It certainly isn't supported by logic. Let's analyze the alleged event.



What are we to believe?



  • That Jesus wasn't powerful enough to do the exorcism without providing a suitable alternate host?


  • That we have a man-god who takes requests from demons as to how they should be dealt with?


  • That Jesus evidently values the requests of demons over the lives of innocent animals, not to mention demonstrating a complete disregard for the financial loss to the pig's uninvolved owners.


Or putting it in contemporary terms, it would be tantamount to:



  • a cop getting the drop on two known murderers, who he caught in the act of committing a new murder.


  • The murderers ask the cop not to shoot or arrest and imprison them but instead to provide them with a lower life form to slaughter instead of their human victim.


  • The cop agrees and offers them the two Irish Setters strolling down the sidewalk.

Even if in the course of dispatching the two dogs, the killers killed themselves, common sense tells us that the owner of those dogs, and the judge hearing his law suit, would have a lot of questions not the least of which would be why an authority, empowered and equipped to dispose of the criminals in a sanctioned manner, saw fit to acquiesce to the criminals’ request and provide them with substitute victims that belonged to an uninvolved third party?


It takes a pretty good imagination, a fanciful embellishment of the scenario, or serious psychological infirmity to come up with a justification, "technically" or otherwise, that would exonerate the cop and not find him derelict of duty, complicit in the act, and fully liable. Of course, theism is a mental infirmity.


No -- The facts are simple: along with his distain for “fags” (per Fred Phelps) and figs [Mark 11:12-14], Jesus also hates pigs. And much like the donkey he had his henchmen "borrow" for him [Mathew 21:2], he's not at all concerned about taking or destroying other people’s property.



Destroying fig trees, stealing donkeys, killing pigs, setting family members against each other -- all clearly indicate a history of sociopathic behavior. Maybe that's why he was crucified. Sounds like he had it coming.

26 comments:

Barb said...

You place far too much importance on fig trees and pigs, Hump. Jesus is Lord of all nature and can do what He wills. He can make stones shout out in praise of God if men don't do it. Pigs and fig trees do not have souls --and in these stories, the only thing I wonder about is that owners didn't protest. Well, actually, I understand why; the owner of the pigs, if he were present, saw evidence that demons were real and that the demons did it --the demonstration of power over demons was much more important than the pigs or the owner's interest. IF anyone owned the fig tree, he probably didn't know why it died. The tree may not have had an owner.
These were object lessons --evidence of Christ's power over demons and nature.

Barb said...

I should add --Jesus is owner of all, as the Son of God. When we "own" something, we really do not --everything we have comes to us from God's hand --and we are stewards, not owners.

Anonymous said...

Barb said:

"I should add --Jesus is owner of all, as the Son of God. When we "own" something, we really do not..."

You, like Jesus, apparently don't believe in property rights. This is very UN-American (perhaps you live outside of the USA?). In the USA, we are a country of LAW and the supreme law of the USA is the Constitution (I challenge you, Barb, to show me anywhere in the USA Constitution stating there are "higher" laws exceeding the USA constitution, specifically "Christian" commandments/laws from the bible).

4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5th Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.



What do the USA Founders consider to be the real cornerstone of man's liberty and happiness? On what basic premise did they devise their Constitution? Let them speak for themselves:

John Adams

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God ... anarchy and tyranny commence. PROPERTY MUST BE SECURED OR LIBERTY CANNOT EXIST"

James Madison

"Government is instituted to protect property of every sort .... This being the end of government, that is NOT a just government,... nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has ... is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest."


So the RESPECT of property rights is a very basic principal of the USA. Hump is indeed placing the appropriate emphasis on PROPERTY RIGHTS and is correctly showing that Jesus and his followers do not respect any individual property rights - You may have no issue with this. However, I suspect if a Christian denomination (that KNOWS that Jesus is blessing and directing them) to appropriate items without asking the owners first, you wouldn't really mind coming back to an empty home when they decided to appropriate items from you for a holy cause...


- Fastthumbs

Barb said...

Fast thumbs --you type with your thumbs? or what?

The Old Testament establishes property rights for God's people --thou shalt not steal, etc.

But everything is nevertheless the Lord's.

God can take what you have. But we don't interpret that to mean the CHURCH can usurp an individual's property. the NT says to respect gov't and law --in so far as there is no conflict with conscience and righteousness.

I'm not aware that the people in Jesus' day made an issue of property rights regarding the fig tree and the demonic pigs.

I can hear Jesus asking you --in my mind's ear --"What is more important --that a man should be delivered of demons --or that a herd of pigs should be spared?"

It was all done to show proof that demons had come out of the man and gone into the pigs. What would make the pigs do what they did on their own? They just want to lie in the mud. It was an object lesson of Jesus' power over demonic powers.

Quibble if you must. Straining at gnats and swallowing dromedaries.

Barb said...

About your book, Hump --self-published?

Anonymous said...

Nah, I can understand why he wouldn't like Pigs. He was Jewish wasn't he? I suppose he'd believe this then:

Deuteronomy 14:

3 Thou shalt not eat any abominable thing.8 And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.So if Jesus saw Pigs as Abominations, then he probably wouldn't mind throwing a few off a cliff.

Of course, that brings us to the question of why Pigs are Unclean to us and we shouldn't eat the flesh.

I'd bet it's probably because human flesh tastes a lot like pork...I mean, not that I've tried it personally, but Cannibals and Gustatory Robots tend to think so.


ThatMr.RogersDude

DromedaryHump said...

BarB,

I'm not the one putting importance on fig trees, pigs, and setting families against eachother...your books of fables are.

Your "maybe the fig tree/pigs didnt belong to anyone" or " the "whats better saving a person or savig pigs" is a rather weak and pathetic attempt at making this all ok.

You conveniently ignore the obvious: jesus lacked power to exorcise the demons with out killing pigs; jesus takes special requests from evil spirts; jesus didnt reimburse the pigs owners for their loss.
But i understand why you ignored it... and invented would a coulda shoulda excuses/apolgetics. Because it's indefensible.


Your proffering that if the owner didnt know why the fig tree died makes it ok..is just idiotic avoidance. If I killed your dog, or your favorite ficus tree when I didnt have to, but you didn't know I did it, would that make it "ok"? Don't be moronic please.
A man-god should beable to handle demons without granting them the right to infest another life form. Afterall..ominicient!
The fact is Jesus as described in these stories was an anti-social psychopath or a weak man-god, or both.


Now..I' going to issue you a warning here: I see youve done alot of posting to my blog. Thats fine. But, you are sprinkling rather cretinous, inventive unsuportable doctrinal perversions and platitudes that bore me and have no bearing on the subject. Stop doing that, or go back to Mud-raker.

Hump

DromedaryHump said...

Barb said: "--Jesus is owner of all, as the Son of God. When we "own" something, we really do not --everything we have comes to us from God's hand --and we are stewards, not owners."

I'm getting really tired of inventive platitudes that are not supported by christian doctrine.

Jesus said: "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's". Jesus told people to sell "their" posessions and give them to the poor.
Nowhere in the bible does Jesus state that all privaetly held posessions / material things are his.

I'm guessing Barb's tampons belong to Jesus. Albeit, why he'd want to claim ownership is beyond me.

Barb..you're banned.
I hate moronic xtians who invent scripture to suit their revisionist theory of christianity.

Hump

.

DromedaryHump said...

Mr. Rogers,

Yes...obviously pigs were selected for this story since they are "unclean" / non-kosher.

However, wanton and unnecessary destruction of someone elses animals would fly in the face of Judaic law. Ba'al Taschit is the Torah's prohibition on wasteful or pointless destruction of property or resources.

So, besides being so weak that he needed a host for the demons; jesus was a fuckin hypocrite since he admonishes his followers to keep the law, but disobeys it himself when his powers fail him.

Barb said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Hump,

Yes, and obviously in the context of Luke 8, it does seem a bit odd.

36 Those who had seen it told the people how the demon-possessed man had been cured. 37 Then all the people of the region of the Gerasenes asked Jesus to leave them, because they were overcome with fear. So he got into the boat and left.See, the narration says one thing, but based on their actions they probably said the same thing as you "Dude, why'd you kill our pigs?! Get the hell out of here!" and exiled him.

- ThatMr.RogersDude

DromedaryHump said...

Mr. Rogers,
yep.They were afraid they'd run outta meat.... heheheh.

Well, they ran him off that time. But his misdeeds finally caught up with him; The Romans weren't taking any chances with THEIR pork supply. ;)

Thanks,
Hump

HoleyHands said...

That...That...That's all Barb.

Barb said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DromedaryHump said...

Barb...
HH said it best.

You wear out your welcome quickly on sites that don't tolerate platatudinous clowns who reinvent christianity to suit their mental defect.

sorry...back to Mudman... if he'll have you.

Hump

Barb said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DromedaryHump said...

sigh... and off we go to moderated comments.

Anonymous said...

Sorry to bring up Barb but this drew my attention.

About your book, Hump --self-published?You wrote a book now? (pardon my ignorance if you did)

ThatMr.RogersDude

DromedaryHump said...

Mr.Rogers,
Indeed.

It is a compliation of the best of my essays over the past two years. Its in design phase, and should be available by July.

Here's a link to my book's site:

http://theatheistcamelchronicles.blogspot.com/

regards,
Hump

Tracey said...

If everything belongs to skydaddy, tell that asshat that the responsibility of making the mortgage payment is his too.

Hump, Jeebus was a sociopathic pig hater who whacked off with bacon grease.
Oreo

Tracey said...

I almost forgot...put me down for 2 autographed copies of your book. One for me, and one for militant atheist son.
Oreo

DromedaryHump said...

Oreo..Heheheh!

I'm just wondering what Jesus does with these, and if he plans to reposess the one stashed away in "Barb's" bedside table? >>

http://www.divine-interventions.com/jackhammer.html

Thanks for your interest in my book.
In June when I set up a paypal link etc on my book site., I'll post a reminder on Atheist Camel blog that it will be ready soon.
thanks again.

Hump

Barb said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I really hate when people wrie religious books. You ...Hump, have no idea no thought of what was running through Jesus' mind when all that happened did occur.
God makes many wonders and has many questions sill lurking of his all-mighty greatness. He has power.... he is power. Never question God's glorious name, and never mock him.
You are make judgment by reading and not understanding entirely. Jesus was a man of parables(which you should know since you wrote that article) and his wonders are as the name states,wonders! never judge them without understanding fully. You have only read hat you have wanted to read an put down rubbish. Re-think your statements, arguemnts and ignorance.

DromedaryHump said...

Anon,

Thank you for that genuine Christian gibberish.

Yeah..i imagine you do hate it when pepole write religious books. Too much information and exposure on fable tends to piss the sheep off.

Parables..indeed. Ressurection is a [parable. Turning water into wine is a parable, walking on water, healing thew blind, reanimating the dead, beaming up to heaven...its all parables, meant to capture the imagination of the most gullible and weak minded.

Whats that you say? those things aren't parable they are real? Ah, you must have a "religious book" that defines what in the bible is real and what is parable.

No wait, that can't be...you hate religious books. Must be you have divined which is meant as parable and which is real. Or maybe Jebus told you in person (hope he didn't drip any blood on your rugs, those stains are a bitch to get out).

Finally, a mindless sheep, who believes ancient fable with no more evidence than you'd have for believing in gnomes, is in no position to even raise the question of ignorance, unless it's referencing your own.

Next post.. sign in with a name please.

Thanks.

Hump

Angel said...

Hump: "So, besides being so weak that he needed a host for the demons; jesus was a fuckin hypocrite since he admonishes his followers to keep the law, but disobeys it himself when his powers fail him."

Yet again, Hump, you pin point the merry-go-round hypocrisy of Christianity. You are correct in calling it a book of screwed up fables. The logic in those mystical/magical stories is so... .. .. never mind. There is no logic in it. If there ever was it was edited out a dozen centuries ago. I laugh out loud when I try to read them now. They were cool as a kid but as an adult they're just fucked up to read and actually believe.

The real message about ownership was (and the only reason why it slipped through the editing process was because it fit the papacy's needs at the time):

"Be in the world but not of it."

That's not too terribly difficult to understand. Follow your nation's laws but know that your soul is different than your belongings. Don't get caught up in counting how much money you have or who has better stuff than you do. You can't take your money with you so concentrate on building, instead, your knowledge and array of experiences in this life. Concentrate on the richness of your soul. But you still have to obey your country's laws. (Even if you kill somebody's demon possessed pigs.)

And in the Vatican-approved Bible Jesus is definitely a pig hater. It's all that antisemitism seeping through... shameful.