Jesus and his coffee

"Jesus & Coffee" cartoon by nakedpastor David Hayward

“Jesus & Coffee” cartoon by nakedpastor David Hayward

Like this cartoon? Get a fine art reproduction of it for just $16 HERE!
Actually, this one simple explanation would solve a lot of the biblical problems, including the frequent outbreaks of inexplicable violence.

You may also like...

16 Responses

  1. Ducatihero says:

    Haha you crack me up!

    Thought of course what Jesus was doing in this and in other situations was being violently opposed to people being denied freedom of access to religious expression. In this case the denial of the use of the temple for gentiles given that it was the outer court that he was driving money changers away from. So – thereby enabling people (gentiles) to be spiritually independent. and free to choose whether to worship or not.

    So – is there any time that is appropriate for physical violence? Well, let’s say I am married and got kids, someone is about to break the door of my house down and the only think between them and the wife and kids is me then they are going to have to come past me first.

    Tough yes just as valid point well made is using religion as an excuse for violence, oppression etc. In fact did not Jesus speak out against this – with matching energy?

  2. Bernardo says:

    Indeed and that lack of caffeine put him on a tree to die as he violated Roman law and was summarily executed by Roman troops. The NT “myth-meisters” geared it up with all the historically nil tripe about his supposedly trial before Pilate and also the Jewish authorities.

  3. Caryn LeMur says:

    This one made me laugh!!

    In my opinion, the authors of the Gospels were careful to show us that Jesus spent the majority of his time teaching, being in dialog, and healing people.

    ‘Turning over tables’ and ‘driving out those making an unjust profit’ was also shown by the authors. However, it was a major point that consumed a minor amount of time.

    I have come to conclude that Jesus was primarily a builder of human beings. He very much minored in anger.

    When I visit churches (via their youtube recordings), and/or visit blogs (via their writings), I try to sense if they are dedicated to the ‘building up’ Jesus or the ‘push tables over’ Jesus.

    That is to say, is their overall theme to engage in dialog, to gently teach and instruct, and to heal the attendees (of emotional wounds or damaged self-esteem)?

    Or, is their overall theme to attack other human beings, to tear down, to defend victims, and to create an ‘us versus them’ atmosphere?

    Even if they are pro-LGBT and pro-a-dozen-things, if they take the latter approach as their dominant theme, I simply avoid their church or blog. I have no desire to risk becoming like them.

    I lean towards this verse: “Do not make friends with a hot-tempered person, do not associate with one easily angered; or you may learn their ways and get yourself ensnared.” [Proverbs 22]

  4. Caryn LeMur says:

    Oh… I should add on.

    People may therefore wonder why I associate with NakedPastor. After all, your cartoons could be taken as tending more towards ‘turning tables over’ than ‘building up’.

    I think I see that NakedPastor is a minor part of your world, David. Being a member of your other community, I see all the time you invest in The Lasting Supper (TLS).

    TLS is heavily geared towards community support, venting, dialog, inter-faith discussions, and mutual respect.

    NakedPastor is, imo, just the public face of David Hayward. It is a card thrown on the table that makes us laugh, wince, recall, and engage in dialog.

    So, I see you (David Hayward) as majoring in building people up.

    No problem.

  5. Gary says:

    Caryn I really appreciated your thoughtful response on this post. What a great way to identify the heart of a church, by identifying how they characterize Jesus. I could not agree more. Though I find myself unable to any longer support organized religion, I am not a church hater. To me, the Jesus incident in the temple demonstrates that Jesus believed there were some types of abuse which required direct challenge. Clearly though, as you astutely pointed out, His focus was on building up not on tearing down. Sadly, I believe the “building up” Jesus has been lost in most of modern Christianity.

  6. Caryn LeMur says:

    Gary: thank you for the kind words.

    Bernardo: lol… your first line cracked me up.

    You have me curious now. Within your philosophy, Bernardo, when do you turn over tables? when do you build other people up? I would like to know more about you on both sides of the coin.

    Cheers! Caryn

  7. Ducatihero says:

    I second Gary’s comment about appreciation for your response Caryn. I like what you say too Gary about actions that “required direct challenge”.

    It reminds me of research I did with one author talking of prophets having sharp irony. In such cases the intention not being to “wound but to cure” and of a commentator saying of Jesus’ words in once instance being “cruel, designed to wound a human heart”.

    I guess I can look at it a bit like a surgeon inflicting a wound with a scalpel in the process of removing a cancer. And yes it being as Caryn rightly and beautifully commented Jesus minoring in anger and primarily being a builder of human beings.

  8. Great discussion. Bernardo… I love conspiracy theories as well. But I don’t tend to believe the major religions were birthed out of a conspiracy, but a genuine religious inspiration (in a non-pejorative sense).

  9. Bernardo says:

    con·spir·a·cy

    a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful ( and in this case harmful to the minds of the peasant and poor and not so poor who supported said Christianity and its hierarchy and aristocracies with their money, sweat and blood in the hope of gaining the mythical state of heaven)

    Conspiracy theories to those who have not read the studies on the real Jesus. For those scholars who did exhaustive research of the scriptures etc. of the first to second centuries CE only ~20% of the ways and word of Jesus are historical. The rest to include the trial of Jesus was invented by the likes of P, M, M, L, J et al. Once again, some web sites to get you started.

    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

    http://www.faithfutures.org/JDB/intro.html

    http://www.biblicalartifacts.com/items/785509/item785509biblicalartifacts.html

    mtio.com/articles/bis-sar24.htm

    http://www.textweek.com/mtlk/jesus.htm

  10. Caryn LeMur says:

    Bernardo: This idea is not new – that somehow the disciples of Jesus created a runaway religion, similar to Scientology, created by Ron Hubbard.

    After all, the early followers of Jesus could gain exceptional fame, outstanding income, status with the Romans, applause from the Jewish State Hierarchy, and generally fleece all the other Jews around Jerusalem with their ‘Messiah has come and died for your sins’ banner.

    God knows how the Jews in Jerusalem (the sacred capital of their nation) were just idiots.

    Gosh… there were probably even tax benefits if they registered with the Sanhedrin as an opposition sect….

    Not.

    What motive do you offer for the earliest disciples creating a runaway religion?

  11. Ducatihero says:

    Lol Caryn.

  12. Bernardo says:

    Another point of view:

    According to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue,

    “Reimarus (1774-1779) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God’s hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus’ failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing.”

  13. Caryn LeMur says:

    Bernardo: you retreat by quoting a theory, but you fail to study its counter-points.

    If what you wrote was the motivation, then the religion should have failed…. and failed quickly.

    What? Grave-robbing in order to possibly get a few coins tossed to your feet?

    What? Jesus was just publically condemned and executed, and someone named Reimarus, offers a theory that the disciples in the Jewish Capital City, governed by the early Pax Romana (peace through threat of the Roman sword), ran around saying ‘a condemned criminal – accused of rebellion against Rome and the Jew’s God – rose from the dead – now, give me some coins and respect?’

    They would have been killed just as fast as Jesus was.

    The Romans and Jewish hierarchy could not have tolerated the beginnings of a fanatical religion built on a ‘resurrected rebel’. The Romans devastated any rebellion in order to ensure Pax Romana continued. The Jewish Hierarchy would have agreed to the devastation of these ‘rebels’.

    Why would they allow this religion?

    Let’s try an American imaginary experiment.

    Let us imagine that in 1870, after the end of the American Civil War, the defeated Southern generals go to the grave of a man that was wildly popular and steal the body. Let us say, the dig up the body of John Wilkes Booth (the famous actor that shot President Lincoln in the theater).

    The Southern generals dig up the body in Baltimore Maryland, and race around the Eastern Coast saying, “John Booth has risen from the dead! Give us respect! Give us money! The South shall rise again!”

    They would have been terminated by the North (and maybe lynched by the South, as well). Over. Done. Gone.

    There was a runaway religion that was created. Where did it get its power to continue?

    Here’s my theory, ‘When a person personally encounters Jesus/God/Holy Spirit, they encounter something too ‘real’ to shrug off. The encounter changes the person at some intrinsic point. ‘ It is that simple.

    Some of my friends call it, ‘Being born again’.

    I don’t care what we call it.

    But Bernardo, that explanation by Reimarus is an explanation of last resort.

  14. Gary says:

    I’m guessing Bernardo believes the 9/11 attacks were carried out by our own government too. And of course that the moon landings were a huge hoax.

    LOL

  15. Ducatihero says:

    Excellent points well argued Caryn.

  16. Bernardo says:

    “Some background on Hermann Samuel Reimarus (22 December 1694, Hamburg – 1 March 1768, Hamburg), was a German philosopher and writer of the Enlightenment who is remembered for his Deism, the doctrine that human reason can arrive at a knowledge of God and ethics from a study of nature and our own internal reality, thus eliminating the need for religions based on revelation. He denied the supernatural origin of Christianity,[1] and is credited by some with initiating historians’ investigation of the historical Jesus.”

    And I believe that 9/11 and the moon landing were hoaxes? Give me a break!! As noted previously:

    Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added “angels” and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

    This agenda continues as shown by the massacre in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Ft. Hood follower of the koran, the Filipino “koranics”and the Boston Marathon bombers.

    And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni “Wannabees” of Saudi Arabia.

    Current crises:

    The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder

    Regarding the moon landing, well I am about to go out and watch a NASA missile launch from Wallops Island. This will not be a hoax and neither have been the other NASA ventures into space.