Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ truth

February 12, 2020 • 9:30 am

The new Jesus and Mo strip, called “source,” came with an email note, “Let us thank God for giving us all of those Perfect Words. Where would we be without them?”. And on the strip the author writes, “Yeah well, you know, that’s just like your opinion, man.”

Apropos, right now I’m in a Facebook tussle (I nearly always avoid social-media fights) with some guys who claim that religion is just as reliable a way of ascertaining truth as is science.

Commenter 1: “Jerry Coyne Conflict on metaphysical facts no more discredits religion than such conflict historically discredits science. In both cases one has to examine the claims in the light of alleged supportive evidence. Just as in science, some religious explanations fare better evidentlialy [sp.] than some others.”

My response:

Commenter 2, a believer, then chimes in: “Jerry Coyne Dying and finding out is not a good option. The question is did Jesus (whoever he was) rise from the dead or molder in the grave like John Brown’s body? Did any of his followers break ranks like Mitt Romney, or did they remain witnesses until they were martyred for their faith? There may be eternal consequences for guessing wrong. Or maybe not. Why roll the dice? I believe in science but it doesn’t promise me a thing.”

And my response to him:

I’m done now. except I sent the second commenter this Jesus and Mo strip. It’s useless to squabble about this stuff, especially on Facebook or Twitter. But like Maru, when I see a box, I must enter. It’s the laws of physics, Jake.

 

13 thoughts on “Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ truth

  1. I would have better luck arguing with by cat why she should get up, go out and get a job. An unreasonable request…

  2. Once upon a time, questions like “have you been vaccinated” could result in a high expectation of an affirmative response (exceptions being mostly those with valid medical reasons for a negative response), and “do you believe that the Earth is flat” could assure a negative response. Nowadays, not so much, unfortunately.

  3. I am really getting tired of NPR these days kissing the ass of “other ways of knowing.”

    It is getting ridiculous.

    If I withdraw my sustainer support for my local NPR station, this will be the main reason (along with their turning into all identity politics all the time).

    1. Some (but not all) NPR stations are also notable for their incessant “underwriters’ messages”, meaning simply commercials. These include, at a Seattle NPR station, endless flak for Subaru, for a brand of whiskey, for a fancy massage chair, for umpteen financial advisors, etc. etc. (In consequence, I leave funding the station to its advertisers.) I wonder whether the indulgence toward “other ways of knowing” at such stations has something to do with their commercialization.

      1. I used to listen to KUOW for many years.

        My current locals are: KNOW (talk) and KSJN (classical music).

        KNOW has an explicit project running to “be inclusive” and view things from the perspective of minorities: It turns out to be 100% Identity Politics.

        They have a weekly program by locals that is essentially a circle-jerk about how all white people are horrible racists. Un-listenable.

        They had a Native American guy on Science Friday a few weeks ago, going on about how the NA spiritual connection to the land was the way to really find out about nature. I could hear Ira Flatow carefully dancing around avoiding the obvious questions: “How do you know that? How would you know if you’re wrong?”

  4. Me dying and arriving at the Pearly Gates: “I really only believed in the Christian God just to cover all my bases and get into Heaven in case He really existed.”

    St. Peter: “Good enough, you’re in.”

Leave a Reply