33 thoughts on “God’s blog (sorry, website)

  1. That actually raises a pretty serious question.

    Why doesn’t Jesus / YHWH / Allah / Krishna / etc. have an Internet presence?

    Alternatively: do any of them read what’s on the innertubes? If so, what’s the IP address of their last hop server?



    1. Ben, I refute you thus – taken from Jesus and Mo themselves:
      “Is that really Jesus?
      Yes, that is really Jesus. I don’t know how he does it, but he always finds time in his busy schedule to appear in the comic whenever someone loads a J&M page in their browser.”

        1. Well, for what it’s worth, 6.6.6 belongs to USAISC at Ft. Huachuca, though it neither has an in-addr.arpa entry nor responds to pings.

          It does trace as far as cpe.ypg.dren.net, though, so clearly there’s some sort of a route for it….



          1. I take it you haven’t been to Texas.

            Slightly more seriously, I haven’t been on the military base itself, but the area around it is spectacular.

  2. Santa Claus has an official Postal Code. H0H 0H0.

    Does that make him more real than those other pretenders?

    1. Wait a few months and try it. Works anywhere in the world and you probably don’t need to specify Canada, though that’s where it will be answered. Just send it to:

      Santa Claus
      North Pole
      H0H 0H0

      and you’ll get a nice reply, which is a far more concrete result than anyone has ever gotten by praying.

  3. “The lemon tree: very pretty. The lemon flower: sweet. But the fruit of the poor lemon? Impossible to eat. Is this a bug or a feature?”

    LOL! All of them!

  4. “Putting boobs on the woman is sexist.”

    As Bart Simpson once said, “that’s funny for so many reasons…”

        1. I hope whatever-it-was that kept you away wasn’t anything too traumatic…? Or, at least, hopefully not more traumatic than being denied the pleasure of our company….


  5. How is it that those who believe in the fantasy of deity can think so little of themselves? It is patently obvious to me that the morality i exhibit on a daily basis, in all my dealings with humanity and other animals, is due to my innate altruism, and not because i feel obliged to placate the perceived whims of some fictitious entity.

    1. “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
      Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
      Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
      Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

      1. It’s worth noting that Epicurus’s original words are long since lost to history, and there’s even some doubt as to whether or not he was actually the first to put that riddle to words. And, one thing we can be certain of is that it wouldn’t have been about “God,” for he wrote it centuries before the Caesars at a time when even the Jews were still polytheistic. At the least, rather than put in terms of a particular deity of a particular pantheon, it would have been expressed in a generic form.

        And, indeed, the generic form is that much stronger. Omnipotence is hardly necessary to fight evil, after all. All one has to do to invalidate claims of a benevolent caretaker is to find a single example of something unquestionably within the caretaker’s power to influence.

        Jesus, for example, allegedly took the time to ensure that one of the t-beams in the rubble of the World Trade Center fell in a manner reminiscent of the torture device used for his own execution, but he did nothing to alter the paths of the jetliners or even cushion the falls of the people who were tumbling alongside the t-beam. Thus, if one accepts the premise that Jesus was responsible for the t-beam cross, one must also accept that Jesus is a motherfucking sonofabitch who cares more about erecting monuments glorifying his own death than saving innocent bystanders.



  6. Pingback: God Has a Blog!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *