The Jesus and Mo artist proves to be a poet, as (s)he shows the holy pair singing for their supper:
Jesus ‘n’ Mo go for a Templeton
March 8, 2011 • 11:06 am
Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
The Jesus and Mo artist proves to be a poet, as (s)he shows the holy pair singing for their supper:
46 thoughts on “Jesus ‘n’ Mo go for a Templeton”
I briefly break my self-imposed exile to LOL.
Awesome. Totally awesome.
It’s quantum something or other (actually, it is).
OMG, thank you for verifying that I’m not crazy! I saw a blink, then convinced myself I didn’t.
or a miracle.
Fairly sure you can’t program quantum… yet.
You most certain can program quantum. Our modern existence depends on it.
Without an understanding of quantum mechanics, the semiconductor is quite impossible, and therefore the modern computer, the internetz and all that.
So, it is quantum something or other. It was an ever-so-small joke on my part.
I thought there was a tiny motion but I decided it was an eye twitch… then read the comment about blinking… then stared really hard and my eyes really DID start twitching… and then I downloaded the GIF and confirmed it has three frames. Freaky.
“singing for their supper” is a new euphemism for Templeton Whore ?
Ho! For fuck sake give it a rest will you, the Templeton organiztion is a noble project to keep science and religion together. It’s a honourable cause that promotes the non overlapping magisteria as Einstein said ‘science without religion is blind and religion without science is lame’ or something like that. The Templeton prize does a lot for science and religion is necessary for our morals. Yet all you can do is mock. I hope that you are throughly ashamed of yourselves. You’re just like the schoolyard bullies picking on our kind religious friends. It’s not big and it’s not clever, you are not helping. Evolution will be forgotten about if you carry on like this.
PS,OK step away from your keyboards the above may or may not be satire:-)
PPS. I bet I had you going there for a minute:-)
PPPS, can I have my million quid now.
It would have been better if you had not used the “f” word and had misspelled noble as Nobel.
Otherwise, it’s a splendid effort.
Add something quantum in there. Quantum something-or-other is guaranteed to raise the T-value of a proposition.
Note to self: quantum thingymebobs, noble/nobel bloody bomb makers:-(
I’m a biologist but I don’t work in biology and I could do with a million quid.
Speaking as a sockpuppet, I’d have to agree with me.
I agree with Polly O:-)
Since I saw it here first, my comment goes here: as I notice someone has already said on the J&M site, this needs more lyrics and some music. Gnu atheists need a hit recording.
Goes with, “Oh, Susannah,” but needs a chorus. Hmmmm. “Oh, Hosannah, oh don’t you lie for me”…?
It’s not far off, can be made to fit. Biggest problem is that the chorus would normally come just after “provenance,” but that would break up the idea, which has continuity here. Here’s a mild chorus suggestion; I’m sure the real J&M can be funnier and ruder (so can I, come to think of it):
Oh won’t you fund our songs?
They’ll put faith back into science,
Which is just where it belongs!
Aack. That’s so good it threatens to become an earworm!
Thanks. I can live with that, just as long as people don’t start believing the lyrics.
“O, Hozannah, won’t you lie for me…”?
Gnu atheists need a hit recording? Are you forgetting Tim Minchin’s Fuck the Motherfucker?
Silly of me – “another” hit recording, of course.
That’s only a pretend hit song. It’s not really a hit song. I can see these Jesus ‘n’ Mo lyrics being perhaps a momentary pretend hit song. I don’t see them being a hit song, as in a real hit song like Rush or Lady Gaga would have. (As opposed to a pretend blogosphere hit song.)
Did you see the Time Machine tour? Awesome!
I don’t know if Tim Minchin actually has any hit songs. I know he has a lot of pretend blogoshphere hit songs.
You win the Pointing Out the Obvious Award for today.
Well, tell him to get a move on and write some hit songs. 😀
As I often like to observe, religion is science — it’s just that it’s bad science.
Religion makes testable claims left and right. It claims that prayer is effective. It claims that there is a noncorporeal essence to our personalities. It claims the existence of profoundly powerful entities that are primarily concerned with our wellbeing.
And, sure enough, each of those claims (and countless more) can be — and repeatedly has been — tested.
A god of even relatively modest powers who wished to diminish the influence of evil could do all sorts of things. For example, such a god could have inspired Hitler to have become one of the great expressionist painters, thereby keeping him out of politics and leading the world into global war and genocide. That we see no evidence of such divine intervention demonstrates that the claimed entities at least lack the will or ability to do their #1 job — assuming they even exist in the first place. The good god hypothesis is therefore disproven as effectively as the lumniferous aether.
In the Hitchens / Wolpe / Harris / Artson debate of the previous thread, Sam made the wonderful observation that we can selectively knock out each and every individual piece of what is considered “us” with targeted damage to specific portions of the brain, yet the religious position holds that, after all of those pieces have been destroyed, the whole magically reassembles itself in some unspecifiable far-off land from which none has ever seen nor returned from. As such, the soul hypothesis is disproven in much the same way that the Peter Pan hypothesis is.
And the literature is littered with peer-reviewed studies of the efficacy of prayer, none of which has shown an effect statistically more significant than a placebo. If prayer were a substance being considered for treatment of disease, the lab developing it wouldn’t even bother submitting it to the FDA for approval.
One can continue on for days in this vein. The Flood would have left visible artifacts on the landscape and unmistrakable signs in all genomes, but it didn’t and thus the theory is disproven. The Zombie Jesus incident would have been the talk of the town, but it wasn’t and thus the theory is disproven. And on and on and on.
That’s what it looks like when one tries to reconcile religion with science. And going the other way would result in, say, the Pope announcing the mass of the Higgs to within four significant figures during his upcoming Easter homily.
Until Templeton starts taking such an approach, one can safely dismiss them as nothing more than an unapologetic apologetic propaganda ministry.
As we often discuss here, religion is not just science. It is history too.
But hey, who said all history has to be accurate?
If only religion *were* history…
After all, even YECs agree that we know a lot more about almost everything since the days they believe Adam and Eve roamed the earth, otherwise they couldn’t get on planes, talk on cellphones or get much medical treatment. One would think that in the process of finding out so much about everything, the evidence for a creator god would also have increased exponentially, if such a being existed. But, no, it’s the only area in which nothing has ever been added to our knowledge, in addition to which we have found good convincing explanations for almost every phenomenon with which that being was credited before we figured a few things out. Do Jesus and Mo need any backing vocalists?
Not(s)he but he. author replies to comments and he is a he. He’s veiled but not totally mysterious.
It’s not Wally, is it?
That’s what she wants us to think.
Uh, that’s what I thought, too. But I can’t tell if you’re joking or not…
I have a banjo in my hands right now, and I can O Susannah with th best of them…but this doesn’t seem to fit – any alternate ideas for a “to the tune of…”?
I have a banjo, and I’m not afraid to use it!
Sorry, but I prefer to devote my evolutionary brain to resolving serious scientific puzzles in religion rather than making fun of singing prophets.
The velocity of the Ascension has been bothering me for a while. Did Jesus rise majestically at regal speed, and took many hours to disappear from sight? In that case, did his apostles leave early due to hunger or tediousness, and left Christ rising without an audience?
Alternatively, Jesus could have taken off like a rocket; but he would have lost his caftan . . . Would he also catch fire? My calc. are inconclusive and I can’t find any hint from the Bible. Ugh!
Clearly he was lifted via tractor beam at a moderate pace until out of sight, then beamed aboard his orbiting ship.
Jesus, clearly, was a very bored James Tiberius Kirk, cocking about with space-time, helping himself to some almond-eyed beauties and violating the Prime Directive.
So when the rapture comes Jesus will be down here flogging cheap hotel rooms with Bill Shatner?
Dunno. But tho’ it probably goes without saying, Bill Shatner and Jesus appearing together on the same infomercial would definitely strike me as a credible sign of the apocalypse.
I have similar questions about Jesus’ propulsion system for the ascension. And just where is he, anyway? In a stable LE orbit?
In an abbey in France I saw this fantastic piece of late medieval religious art; a wall painting of the ascension, with all the disciples starting reverently upwards, and just this pair of feet hovering right at the top of the picture.
proves to be a poet, as (s)he shows the holy pair singing for their supper:
I thought for sure that was going to say “as (s)he didn’t even know it”. I thought it was going to read “proves to be a poet, as (s)he didn’t even know it.” (But then I read the rest of the sentence.)
Wolpe was just in Miami and I was urged to attend his talk and challenge his nonsense. I decided it would be better not to do that since I didn’t want to tick off the whole community.
The only future for Judaism is the secular humanistic variety that views Judaism as a culture. No gods, no supernatural mysteries, no “Jewish values.” Just an appreciation of what is real, moral education that is based on universal ethics and a love for Jewish culture, history and (non-theistic) celebration.