God is a Dick - Part XXIX: Christ’s Name-Calling
You may remember a little incident back in 2004 in which Prince Harry gave the paparazzi the finger. This created quite a stir in the media because he’s royalty, and we expect better of him. However, Harry was still a teenager at the time, and his father was not a king, but a prince. For a more flagrant example of unacceptable behavior, we now turn away from the Prince of Wales and look at the Prince of Peace. Unbefitting his position as the only son of the one true god, Jesus had a penchant for name-calling and childish taunts, and he was in his thirties at the time. One can only imagine what a nasty child he must have been, because we have no record of his youth (other than the apocryphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas). This week we will look at the types of verbal abuse Jesus heaped upon his enemies… and his friends.
One group Christ particularly liked to abuse was the Pharisees. Now in all fairness, they were plotting to kill him. However, name-calling doesn’t seem like the best (or most mature) response to such a threat. At one point, the Pharisees heard about Jesus curing a blind mute. They attacked him, saying that he healed by the power of Beelzebub rather than god. Jesus didn’t take that well.
“Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. (MAT 12:34 NIV)
Jesus likes calling people vipers. He does it several times, and seems to have picked it up from John the Baptist. This is just my favorite example, because he also calls them evil and compares their words to rotten fruit. Sure, it’s a mixed metaphor, but it’s very colorful, don’t you think? Anyway, the Pharisees are the target once again a few chapters later when they ask Jesus for a sign from heaven. Since he spent much of his time producing signs from heaven, it’s hard to understand why this would be a problem, but Jesus doesn’t take requests.
A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” Jesus then left them and went away. (MAT 16:4 NIV)
…to talk with his disciples about one of his miraculous signs in verse 9 on the same damn page. Anyway, it wasn’t just the Pharisees Jesus picked on. He attacks Jews in general in the gospel of John. It should be noted that John’s agenda in regard to Jews is, to put it nicely, questionable.
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (JOH 8:42-44 NIV)
Wow! That’s one hell of a statement. Has Jesus forgotten that he’s a Jew? Isn’t this the same thing he was so upset that the Pharisees accused him of back in Matthew 12? Apparently he can dish it out, but he can’t take it.
Jesus doesn’t just stay at home and abuse his own people. He goes off to find gentiles to pick on. In Mark 7, Jesus travels to Tyre. Despite his efforts to keep a low profile, word spreads that he is in town, and a Greek woman from Syrian Phoenicia comes to him and throws herself at his feet, begging him to cast a demon out of her daughter. This is a subtle one, so pay attention.
“First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.”
“Yes, Lord,” she replied, “but even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”
Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.” (MAR 7:27-29 NIV)
It’s a cryptic insult, but an effective one. The “children” are the Jews. The “dogs” are the gentiles. Basically, he says “I can’t heal one of you people while there are still Jews to be healed.” Only by her obsequious, self-deprecation and acceptance of the label he has put on her does she earn a cure for her suffering daughter. So much for Jesus loving the little children. Apparently, he only really loves the Jewish ones.
Now we come to the part where Jesus turns on his own disciples. Despite his lecture to the Pharisees about how a house divided against itself cannot stand, he goes after his closest followers with that razor tongue of his. In Matthew 17, a man brings his possessed son to Jesus, telling him that the disciples were unable to heal the boy. Jesus turns on those who failed to drive out the demon.
“O unbelieving and perverse generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring the boy here to me.” (MAT 17:17 NIV)
Well, not long actually, but that’s another story. Jesus has promised that those who believe in him will be able to do the things that he does, so he concludes that the failure to exorcise a demon is a sign of disbelief. Hey, when was the last time Pat Robertson cured a leper? …but I digress.
Let’s finish up with one of the most famous quotes from Jesus. In Matthew 16, Jesus tells Peter that he will be the rock on which the church will be built, and gives him the figurative keys to heaven. This is the passage upon which the Catholic Church and the papacy were founded. This sets Peter up as the most important of the apostles, and basically makes him second in command to Jesus. Obviously Jesus has a lot of faith in the guy. However, in the NEXT PARAGRAPH, after Jesus tells his followers that he is going to go to Jerusalem to die, the tone changes somewhat.
Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.” (MAT 16:22-23 NIV)
Hmmm. So, which is it? Is Peter the greatest of the apostles, foundation of the church and holder of the keys to heaven, or is he Satan? Perhaps, he is both. That would certainly explain a few things, don’t you think?
Let’s review. Jesus, god’s representative on earth, can’t get past childish taunts and name-calling. He attacks the Pharisees, Jews in general, gentiles and his own most trusted followers. He calls them vipers, evil, perverse, wicked, adulterous, children of the devil, dogs and Satan himself. All this happens in between episodes in which he tries to teach people to be nice to their enemies and turn the other cheek. He’s a hypocrite at best. And at worst? Dick.
~I AM~
P.S. I’m thinking about retiring this series soon. I haven’t made up my mind, but it’s on the table. Each week, it gets harder to find good material, and I don’t want to keep it going so long that it starts to suck, like so many TV shows have done. So, I’d like your opinion. Have I been keeping up the quality of this series, or is it starting to wane. Are you getting bored with it, or do you still enjoy it every week? Would you be crushed if I replaced it with something else? I’m considering “God is an Idiot” or a series profiling the silly beliefs of various religions.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 12:39 pm
Quality’s still good, but challenging religion from a new angle sounds like a good idea.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 12:39 pm
I’ve really enjoyed the “God is a Dick” series, but if you are running short on material, by all means move to something else. I’d particularly enjoy the ’silly beliefs’ if you went that route. No reason to “jump the shark” when you know it is coming
January 22nd, 2006 at at 12:47 pm
Well, if you published the entire “God is a Dick” (GiD) series now, the paperback version would only be a little over 100 pages (1,400 words AVG x 29 posts / 350 AVG per page of paperback). So, I think you have some more work to do to make it really marketable. Although, some really god cartoons and illustrations could make up the difference.
Alternatively, if we assume that each GiD post represents the introduction to a chapter of your book. Then the next logical step would be to expand on the theme of each chapter as introduced by each GiD post. This still means you have some work to do, but allows you to expand in other directions.
Oh, am I being a bit presumptuous…?
No but seriously, I like the format and think that you could keep the title and just expand the content base to include things other than literal bible interpretations.
P.S. If you haven’t already, you really should copyright the title, just in case.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 1:12 pm
Every sunday I wait with anticipation for a good laugh, and you never fail to give me that. Amazing how people worship this filth. Prince of peace my ass.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 1:23 pm
The quality is still there to mebut maybe you need to try the other ideas you have for a while then come back to GID. If its stale for you; its stale.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 1:30 pm
I vote to keep it. Xtians go to church every Sunday (well, some of them do); atheists can go to God Is a Dick. Evangelically speaking, a personal (GODal?) line of attack is more powerful than a rational, because emotion trumps reason for the gullible. They have no problem suspending reason to have faith in the supernatural, but it’s harder to reconcile that your deity is indeed a dick.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 1:41 pm
I don’t think you should retire the series. I’m surprised you are having a tough time finding good material. I like the idea of you taking a break and trying something else for awhile. That will help keep you from getting bored, and God is a Dick will be fresh again with a good break. It also allows you to try new things.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 2:01 pm
I rather enjoy the series myself, & would like it to continue on.
I’m unclear: have you covered the Apocrypha? I agree w/the Atheist Messiah: if you’re feeling in a rut, a brief respite would perhaps be in order.
Or maybe the Gnostic Gospels? Popul Voh? Just thoughts.
It would be grand if there were an online compilation of your work to be found in 1 place. I would find it most gratifying.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 3:21 pm
I can understand your confusion, but you need to look a little deeper. You make the same mistake that many people do–you fail to study the Bible in all its contexts–scriptural, cultural, or historical. You are, in effect, pulling out quotes to back your claim but with the eyes and understanding of someone who lives in the 20th century in the western world. The main question you should ask yourself is, is it the people he was attacking, or their attitudes?
What were the Pharisees all about? The Pharisees lorded their brand of paralyzing legalism in the guise of judgemental spirituality on the Jewish people. They loved and honored themselves more than God. They had no mercy, love, or patience for the poor or “sinners”. Why is there any shock that Jesus, who was God come to earth, might take offense at people who claimed they knew all about God, that they were perfect, and subjected their people with merciless, stifling legalism?
Why would Jesus balk at the Pharisee’s request for a sign? First of all, he had already been giving them signs! What does it take for them to get it? Second of all, his point is that he (God) is not a being who should be called upon to perform parlour tricks at our beck and call.
Was Jesus attacking the Jews in JOH 8:42-44? No, he was attacking unbelief. His point was, since his coming was well documented in Jewish scripture, and since he had been providing the signs that would indicate he was, indeed, the Messiah, if they had been paying attention, they should have been able to figure that out. He’s not attacking their Jewishness. Their Jewishness should have led them to believe he was the Messiah. Rather, he’s attacking their unbelief.
Was Jesus contradicting himself when he first called Peter a rock only to turn around and call him satan? Check out the context. First, Peter declared that he acknowledged that Jesus was the Son of God. Jesus answered by saying the church will be built upon “this rock” (Catholics interpret the rock to be Peter, non-Catholics interpret the rock to be the declaration that Peter made about Jesus). Later, when Jesus tried to prepare the disciples that he would be crucified, Peter says, “never.” Jesus then says, “get behind me, satan.” What this indicates is that Jesus had a choice in regards to crucifixion. He knew it was necessary to fulfill his role as Savior, but satan was giving him an alternative (check out the temptation in the desert for more details). Peter was echoing this temptation in his statement, and Jesus was pushing away that temptation.
Something to understand here is that the Jews, the Pharisees, and the disciples themselves really didn’t understand what Jesus was up to. What did they think he was all about? They all thought he was about establishing God’s kingdom on Earth, and in so doing, wrest power from the Romans and re-create a Jewish state. For the average Jew and the disciples, they put their hope in this Messiah. For the Pharisees, they saw him as another threat to the weak hold on power that they had. This wasn’t Jesus’ purpose, however. If you are reading the Bible, you will see that Jesus avoided every attempt to crown him king. His purpose was not to establish an Earthly, physical kingdom, but to establish a Spiritual kingdom in which all people can find salvation through belief and trust in him. He says this over and over in the Gospels. That was his purpose, and that is what everyone at that time (and many at this time) failed to understand.
If you continue to read the Bible, I hope you can see the contradiction in the things and people that Jesus valued as opposed to what the religious leaders of the day valued. The religious people valued power, influence, wealth, and the appearance of religious piousness. What was Jesus’ message? Who did Jesus hang out with? Who did he show mercy and compassion to? Did the pharisees show mercy and compassion to these people? When you learn the answers to those questions, maybe you will more clearly understand why he was so hard on the religious leaders of the day (and maybe you will also get some insight to what he might have to say to the religious leaders of our day). I also suggest you read “The Jesus I Thought I Knew” by Philip Yancy for a better insight and understanding of these passages and Jesus purpose.
Keep up the questioning, but I urge you to be more diligent in how you study the Bible. You’re just dancing around on the surface right now.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 3:41 pm
Igor the ‘wonderful’ thing about what you said is that for each person who reads that ‘book of god’ the bible you will have another interpretation : what is litteral what figurative and what the figurative means.
I put up with way less BS from say a Microsft manual for my computer but you somehow think its ok for a ‘god’ to pass this crap off as an instruction manual for my life?
I think it is YOU who needs to be looking at what that means.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 4:11 pm
I can understand your confusion, but you need to look a little deeper. You make the same mistake that many people do–you fail to study the Bible in all its contexts–scriptural, cultural, or historical.
Igor, if you have “diligently studied” the bible, and still think that scriptural, cultural, or historical perspective, make any difference what so ever, then I think you have gone in way too deep. As in, off the deep end.
The more I study the bible, the more I loath it. It is an ill-conceived poorly organized pile of melodramatic drivel, designed to control and manipulate the gullible and the emotionally dispossessed.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 4:34 pm
I AM, in no way has the God is a Dick series become any less enjoyable than it ever was! However, if you feel the need to branch out into other religions, I could perhaps dig through and provide some background on Hinduism (which I was raised in, and inspite of my parents’ best efforts, which I could never bring myself to believe in). One epic that you could REALLY easily take apart is the Ramayana. This could get to be a VERY long post if I actually started trying to explain all the dickery therein, but I’m here as a resource if you should need one!
- Radi
January 22nd, 2006 at at 5:52 pm
I find this interesting. You say that Satan was “giving him an alternative”? If Jesus has to do X to fulfill his assigned role, then he has the alternative of not doing X. No one has to “give” him this alternative, it exists as the negative space of a positive action. I know Satan’s supposed to be a capable fellow but I think you’re giving him a bit too much credit in laying logical negation at his feet.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 8:05 pm
I enjoy the series. If you do end it (even if you dont), a webpage would be cool with all of them in one place! I guess it’s too much to ask for a published book…
January 22nd, 2006 at at 9:35 pm
Igor:
Interesting, as Peter’s name was Kepha which translates loosely to ‘rock’. But if my poor memory serves, the phrase ‘Petra’ or ‘Petris’ was used.
Oh, this old tired refrain… again. It’s called ‘moral relativism’. The sword cuts both ways.
If your book is a crockload, why spend time investigating the symbology, allegory, all that? I’ve heard this argument before. I believe most of us have. Seeing it thru ‘Aristotellian eyes’ is the best nutshell I can put it in.
There’s a word for doing one thing and saying another. Symbolic or not.
January 22nd, 2006 at at 10:28 pm
I love it, it’s my favorite bit. But I really like the site in general, so whatever you do is good with me.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 8:26 am
In reading through the replies, I think the tongue-in-cheek suggestions may be on to something - wrap the series up with part XXX (30 is a good round number and you’ll finally have hit the porn industry’s moniker
), then combine them all into a clean, formatted document and turn it into a .pdf. If you really wanted to, you could then give people the option of buying a copy from Lulu.com or something like that. At the very least you could put together the .pdf with chapter headings and such for peoples’ reading enjoyment.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 10:09 am
I love the series and would hate to see it go. If you need a sabatical from it, that’s fine. I enjoy the series and learn a great deal from it.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 11:35 am
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. It was very helpful, and I’m thinking about things somewhat differently now. I haven’t quite decided what I’m doing yet, but I can promise you at least one more.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 11:45 am
30 chapters is a nice round number.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 11:57 am
LBBP:
You wanna be my agent?
January 23rd, 2006 at at 2:06 pm
Love the GiD series. Would love to see all parts together as i have missed many of them.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 3:22 pm
I’m assuming that those of you who are asking for a compilation don’t know you can click on the category name to see them all. Go here.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 4:01 pm
Igor Says:
Your “assessment” of the Pharisees, comes probably from the four gospels and the christian pulpit for hundreds of years. Have you personally studied the Pharisaic order? Have you spoken or spent time with some Pharisees, to determine their “merciless, stifling legalism”? There is an argument for Jesus being a Pharisee. Quite a few sayings of Christ are straight out of Pharisaic texts.
Stupid Jews…
That is such a classic Christian argument for dispelling the Jews from not recognizing Jesus as the Messiah. This is the argument stemming from the lack of proof in Jesus as the Messiah. Christians have been taught that the Jews were just spiritually dead and unable to see all the signs or “writing on the wall” and should have just welcomed Jesus warmly. The Messiah would actually lead them back to observing the Law of Moses, not help them cut the ham for Easter dinner (that being just one of many requirements for the Messiah). Please provide the “well documented” proof that the Jews just could not see that makes Jesus the Messiah. Please cite the chapter and verse where the Hebrew god is to be come man and then live on earth and die for the sins of humankind from the “Jewish scriptures”.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 4:06 pm
I AM:
Sorry, figured it out AFTER I posted.
Wouldn’t ya know it? D’oh!
January 23rd, 2006 at at 5:45 pm
Please, keep the series up. I’m from Europe and all our believers (except Jehova’s Witnesses, including, though, all non-Christians) are too polite to give their dirty secrets sufficient airing to be laughed at. I do rely on you for a good giggle
In return and since I have no way to send you money, I would be willing to depart with my cheesecake recipe 
On the other hand, you would perhaps like a recipe for making blood better? At least the “Blood of St Januarius”:
http://www.cicap.org/en_artic/at101014.htm
I would understand, though, if you wanted to turn down the frequency and(or) threw in other hilarious things. The “silly beliefs all over the world” sounds quite tantalising.
January 23rd, 2006 at at 8:51 pm
The GiD series, is, in my opinion, the highlight of this site. Keep up the good work! I have foudn taht the humor and creativity of your chapters have not gotten worse at all. I wouldn’t, however, mind if you decided to take a break. But please don’t stop it entirely:!:
I agree with Radi. If you are at a lack of ideas, why not branch into other religions more often? Your tag is after all, “helping mankind overcome religion”. Hinduism, to my knowledge, has not yet been mentoned. Or maybe other ones?
January 24th, 2006 at at 2:28 am
I would like to see you profile silly religious beliefs.
I would also like to see you preach to atheists. That’s basically humanism, but you could be clever as usual and come up with something unique.
January 24th, 2006 at at 9:24 pm
I Am,
I think I just had a great idea, “The Manchurian Pope” what do you think? How hard could it be? They believe whatever they’re told. If we can turn a cardinal or even a bishop, we could be stoked. Just think of the possibilities.
January 25th, 2006 at at 9:41 pm
I, for one, wouldn’t mind a change, however, this series still delights me. Perhaps a hiatous is in order, rather than retirement? Either way, I look up to you, please continue to be a badass.
January 26th, 2006 at at 6:27 am
Hinduism was covered in installment XVIII. Now, some of the more popular religions (aka “myths” — e.g. Norse and Greek/Roman) might have been skipped over. They offer up as many examples as today’s major religions, but their multiple gods had much more human qualities, and thus the contrast between “GOD” and dick wouldn’t be so great.
Of course Yam isn’t running out of material. We all know you have a better chance of opening the bible to a random page and finding dickery than inspiration. It’s just that some of it can start to get repetitive. I’m sure he’s itching to demonstrate god’s idiocy (or impotence, or myopia, or etc, etc.).
It’s your world, Yam, do you.
Reluctant Atheist: I was going to bring up the Kepha point. Good job.
January 26th, 2006 at at 6:30 am
Regarding Igor’s “description” of the Pharisees:
“The Pharisees lorded their brand of paralyzing legalism in the guise of judgemental spirituality on the Jewish people. They loved and honored themselves more than God. They had no mercy, love, or patience for the poor or “sinners”. ”
Now where in the word would they get some idea like that?! Hmmm…I know! Sounds pretty much like the Jewish God to me.
January 26th, 2006 at at 9:44 pm
I have an idea for a series. For every city or region or business that Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell or other loonie fundies condemned for whatever transgression committed (e.g. rejecting ID in Dover, PA, or Disney having Gay Day), check to see if any terrible calamities have befalled these places since. For example, with Disney, has the companies profits increased since Gay Day was started, has Disneyland’s attendance gone up and done and so forth?
January 27th, 2006 at at 2:20 am
Is it name calling or just the terms of the day?
February 4th, 2006 at at 12:02 am
lol Tk