When I eventually redo my About Me page again, I want to make clear that the one of the main goals is that everyone leaves this webpage happy… except for Commies and hippies. Apparently, I have not been meeting that goal.
First off, the spat between me and Bill Whittle is a joke. In yesterday’s Links of the Day when I made fun of Bill and told people to say how much you hate him, I was just kidding. Apparently, someone who will remain nameless (cough… joey d… cough…) did not seem to understand this and made nasty enough comments as to cause Bill to close down his comments section again. I consider Bill Whittle to be the best writer in the blogosphere, and, even though I don’t ultimately control my readers, I feel like a complete jerk for even being involved with this. I think it would be nice for the commenter involved to e-mail the injured party and apologize.
Had some interesting comments in my first ever Frank Answers post. One’s a funny parody of a Bill Whittle essay by apotheosis, and the other is one (or a couple) accusing me of blasphemy. Just to be clear, I am a Catholic, and, as I think I made it obvious in my Easter post, I believe Jesus kicks serious ass. At the same time, by creating humanity, I think the Lord opened himself up to satire. Religion goes against logic much of the time, and I can’t help but poke fun even as I have faith. That said, there certainly is a line than can be crossed were parody does become blasphemy. I think I was closest to that line when I had Jesus use a swear word, but, dammit, the phrase “mind-f**k” was just too apropos for the situation. Anyway, I think Jesus would find my post funny, as I was kidding Him just as I would kid other people I respect and admire. Also, I can’t imagine the Supreme Being lacking a sense of humor (I think quantum physics is His version of a practical joke). I would like the opinion of other Christians, though, of whether I did go too far (and, for those who may be confused, Catholics are Christians too).
For everyone else, I would point you to this nice essay by Steven den Beste on atheists. Before I became involved with the blogosphere, I had the opinion that all atheists were a bunch of hyper idiots with chips on their shoulders, but I luckily found that is not always true (it’s just those are the most vocal ones). The Raving Atheist seems to be one of those ‘vocal’ ones, so much so that I wonder if it’s all just a shtick. Usually, I don’t let myself get provoked (I’m less funny that way), but his manifesto “proving” there is no God was so idiotic that a while ago I posted to his message board a “proof” that the Objectivist principle of “A is A” is wrong:
Here is why “A is A” doesn’t make much sense:
They’re two f**king different A’s!!! How the hell could they be each other! One is the A on the right and one is tha A on the left! If they were each other, then how could I say, “That is that ‘A’ and that is the other ‘A'”? What kind of crack must Objectivists be smoking to think that “A is A”? If that’s one of their tenets, then I wouldn’t be surprised if another one is to wear your hat on your feet and your pants on your head.
And now I have disproved “A is A” about as much as you disproved there is a God (I’m refering to your “Basic Assumptions”). It’s an entertaining method, but I hope you don’t take it seriously.
Just thought I’d share.
I might as well add some links of the day while I’m at it. Silent Running is now a TV show. They already got an instalanche for their move (I didn’t when I moved), but I said I would link to them today, and I don’t want anyone to call Frank a liar (except when I make a post clearly labeled “Filthy Lies”).
Also, the man is trying to take On the Fritz down for their mocking of poor, senseless defenseless celebrities.
Finally, Rachel Lucas finds the funniest thing ever.
Tomorrow, a new interview with the biggest name yet and more Frank Answers.
Anybody calls you a dishonest filthy liar Frank, let me know. I can get in touch with some folks that’ll kneecap’em for a couple of cartons of smokes. Well, they’d kneecap me for a couple of cartons of smokes, anyway. Not sure what they’d charge you, but I’m sure they could come up with an easy payment plan of some sort, and maybe even throw in a car stereo.
A isn’t A? Is Frank J. Frank J.? If not, I probably oughta remove the A is A sticker from my car.
Sigh. It’s so cute.
hln
Frank: I, too, am a Catholic and am positive that the Lord has a great sense of humor. I don’t think you crossed the line–especially since you used asterisks!
Right wing conservative Christians can have fun too. Damn shame we have to end up in hell for it though. Unless you do penance. I have discussed this with a man in a robe claiming to be a priest and he says as contrition you must do ten Hail Marys and double your number of posts.
As I am not Catholic, can you explain what the hell football has to do with any of this?
I do not believe that God exists. That doesn’t mean that I have concluded that God does NOT exist. As Steven Den Beste wrote a few days ago (in an essay it would have taken me a frikkin’ year of tweaking to do such a great job), the non-existence of God cannot be proven. So, a self-proclaimed Athiest is someone who has made a kind of a Leap Of Faith that God does not exist.
The correct statement would be “I believe that God does not exist”. That’s a statement of non-belief that doesn’t suggest that I take the truth on faith — the central issue — just as believers do.
And anyone who says Catholics aren’t Christians has Grammaw Spork to contend with.
I was raised a Protestant (Congregational), but my maternal family (the half I actually have any regular contact with) is Catholic. And, while I understand many Protestant gripes about Catholicism ((calling priests “father”, praying to (or: through) graven images(statues), near-deification of a man (the Pope, by saying he’s, in any respect, infallible), the entire “saint” thang, etc)), to claim that Catholics are not Christians stems from the same Us vs Them worldview that excites the Raving Athiests.
Agnostics, almost by definition, respect the value of faith. The “Raving Athiests” have faith in their own conclusions. And, by exhibiting faith reveal “the rest of the rant” to be stubbornly, even supremecist, when they say (as most R.A.’s do) “I’m an Athiest and Proud of It.”
Pride comes before a fall, and the fall is the conclusion. Or, better yet, as Steven Wright said; “A conclusion is the place where you decided to stop thinking.”
Frank, you’ve got a gift for humor, but some people just can’t handle it when something they hold dear is satirized. Screw’em. In the immortal words of Rick Nelson, you can’t please everyone, so you’ve got to please yourself.
I’m often surprised by how people feel Bill’s the best writer in the blogosphere. Not that he’s not good, because he is. But because he frankly needs an editor’s knife at times.
Ah, but I’m just being picky. It’s the editor in me. And no one ever says I’m the best writer in the Blogosphere. 🙂
He’s definitely got that wonderfully patriotic and emotional touch though.
As a conservative Christian, I will say that if God doesn’t have a freakin’ crazy sense of humor, then he has some serious ‘splainin to do. I mean, if he didn’t have a sense of humor, would he have made, say, the duckbilled platypus? It’s obvious those were made purely for our entertainment. 😉
For crying out loud, G-d made ME!
Now if THAT doesn’t prove that He has a sense of humor, nothing ever will!
Oh, I think Jesus would get a kick out of your posts. C’mon. After Cardinal Law et. al you don’t think he needs someone around to tell a few jokes?
Not Offended Catholic Cathy
Linky Dinks
I’ve been cruising around the Internet this evening, looking for Fritz fodder. Here is some of what I’ve found and worthy of ridicule: I got a chuckle out of this socio-political analysis of the X-men comics that appears on The…
Frank, as a conservative, born-again, bible reading, church-attending Christian, I think that the mental image of Jesus saying “mind f**k” may be the funniest thing ever. not only was I not offended, but I think that the idea deserves a graphical depiction (ala Glenn Reynolds, puppy drinker). And hey, if we’re wrong, and Jesus is really pissed, that’s what forgiveness is for, right? I mean, if we we’re perfect, who’d need Jesus, anyway?
The question remains, then: did he actually say, “mind-f**k?” Like, “mind-f-asterik-asterik-k?” I think it’s safe to say that this question is on every American’s mind right now.
I don’t know anything about your atheist friend or his manifesto, nut “A is A” is not something peculiar to Objectivists. Yes, Ayn rand uses that term for the title of one of the parts of “Atlas Shrugged” but she does it to pay homage to Aristotle, to whom she was paying homage. Basically, it’s one of his (Aristotle’s) basic postulates he uses to set out the logic and philosophy of pursuiing knowledge. Nothing particularly objectivist (or atheist) about it.
Mr. Kickstar, you gotta be kiddin’ me. Please explain to me how you can call yourself born-again and not find this offensive? Millenia ago when jewish scribes wrote the scriptures by hand they would actually go through a lengthy process of cleansing and purification before they even wrote the Lord’s “name”. They knew how to respect their creator, we have lost all respect for Him.
So if Aristotle’s Law of Identity has been refuted thus (A!=A), can Los Bravos’ Law of Color Identity (“Black Is Black“) still be true? Does this sudden fundamental shift in basic epistimology alter the desire for the return of the Other?
Only Objectivists and atheist think A is A because the concept is so ridiculous 🙂
Martin,
You are starting to sound a bit like a Christian bigot, and thus my worry about offending you is waning.
Martin:
“please explain to me how you can call yourself born-again…” It’s pretty simple. I realize that I am a sinner, that redemption is only found in Jesus, then accept his gift of forgiveness. My possibly warped sense of humor plays no factor in that equation.
Jewish scribes, unfortunately, did not have that option (being pre-ressurection, and all) and so were bound by the Levitical law. I would point out that they were copying holy scripture. I, on the other hand, am merely commenting on a blog.
I’ll freely admit that I may be wrong. I can just chalk it up with the other thousands of times daily that I fail to meet God’s expectations, and try to do better. I’ll refer to my earlier post and remind you that that’s what Jesus is for. As my father-in-law is fond of saying: “I’m f**ked up, that’s why I need Jesus.”
Mr. J., I think any god or gods have to have a sense of humor. You nailed it when you said that he showed it by making humans.
I think it’s kind of a Laurence Simon sense of humor. I mean, read the Bible. He f**ks with the Jews constantly. They piss him off, he sends them into slavery. I bet it makes him laugh every time. I have to admit, if he exists, I am counting on him having a sense of humor. If not, I have some explaining to do. Like this, ‘why doesn’t Jesus eat M&Ms? They fall through the holes in his hands.
See you in hell.
I think Frank may have gone a little too far in having Jesus swearing, but I am pretty sure He has a sense of humor.
Also, I’m a protestant, and most of us do realize that Catholics are Christians. Obviously we have some differences, sometimes pretty serious ones, but we’re all Christians.
hey Frank, i can slap joey d on back of the head, he sits next to me in third hour.
Frank, I, too, read Den Beste’s post on atheism and found it the most intellectually honest thing on the topic I’ve ever seen.
As I wrote to him in response, I hope he becomes a Christian. But if not, I will gladly plead his case with the Lord on Judgement Day. Anyone who is that honest is a decent and honorable man, and last I knew, the Judeo-Christian God I worship didn’t have any trouble with honor or decency.
Me, I’m tickled pink that a fellow Catholic has such a great sense of humor. Keep it up, brother!
Jesus would have had lunch with you, Frank. I think He was pretty tolerant of most of our weaknesses. The thing He hated the most was hypocricy. That reallys set Him off, and boy isn’t that the worst thing about so-called “Christians.” Their glaring hypocricy.
Meh, I don’t think it’s blasphemous.
But then, I am also someone who reads gay porno fiction involving the Apostles for a cheap laugh.
Well, there you go calling my philosophy ridiculous, and meaning it, and yet I am not offended by your comments.
I think some people just have a hard time relaxing, and being confident in their faith.
I am mostly an Objectivist (I say mostly, as I take issue with certain principles), and relaxed and happy with that. I feel no need to “convert” people away from their philosophies of faiths, nor to mock them in any way. Neither do my religious friends, which are legion.
The saddest thing to me are the folks who cannot be content with their beliefs, and are constantly trying to force others into their line of thinking – either by mocking them or aggressively “pushing the faith”. That to me shows a non-believer, someone who is insecure in their belief system – so much so that they must get others to agree with them, so they may have some supposed validation that they are correct.
Anyone who belives that truth comes from the numbers who subscribe to the doctrine need to take a good hard look at the Democratic party.
They sure have numbers, and they are almost never right about anything.
So, despite your lashing of my philosophy, I will continue to read and enjoy IMAO for as long as you are around. And yes, I knew you were a Catholic long before now.
Good times, Frank.
Frank, if I remember my word origins correctly, if Jesus happened to use the combo “mind-F.U.C.K.” he would only be using an acronym from the King James version of the Christian bible; “For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge”. At the beginning of the great metropolis New York City (New Amsterdam), New Amsterdam police wrote up prostitutes For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge and eventually scribbled the acronym for short. I believe but am not positive that early police logs can be found that substantiate this word origin claim. I’m trying to look up a link on the Internet to reference for you but am having trouble narrowing the search;-). (Anybody know of a good word origin site?)
I have no issue with anyone who believes that God does not exist or cannot comprehend the Jesus thing; I fear the man or woman who wishes to be “I am that I am”. BTW, “I am that I am” is the one object that satisfies the “A is A” principle. My evaluation of other human beings utilizes a Clintonian grasp of the nuances of two words, “as” and “like”. When an individual explains their view(s), I listen for indications of whether they would prefer being “as” or “like” God given the choice. Those who prefer being “as” are the ones to worry about.
I better clarify the point I was making. The point being that the very same attitude which drives the “converter” is the same attitude that compels people to ask Frank to censor himself, to appease their idea of “correct”.
Right. On with the day.
I am not an athiest. I am not a Christian.
I am agnostic and therefore I am correct!
well it appears that nobody can take a joke, as i was ALSO JOKING, i didnt think anyone would be a little girl and cry about it, so sorry Bill and Frank, i should just stop joking forever, it brings nothing good. P.S. Mikey has removed the element of surprise, so il be ready for him!
As I will be ready for you.
NO U WONT
Mikey, hit Joey D.
Coz,
Agnostic is the only logically defensible position, but I gave up on logic years ago.
Mikey does hit me…every day. and i just stayed at a holliday inn, so he better watch out
I scrubbed my hands raw with Lava soap before I made this.
Actually, joey D is a good guy. He’s a funny and probally really was joking. i wouldn’t hit Joey d if he didn’t go steal all the no war signs and put them in my front yard
Frank, I’m catholic and I find your site hilarious. You definately didn’t offend me. 🙂
Thanks Mikey, i threw all those signs in a dumpster where they belong
Hi Frank,
This is my third ever post. I read your thing on Jesus, and while I do think that God has a sense of humor, He is also Holy and worthy of our praise. It did seem to me that you were coming pretty close to taking something, Someone, who is Holy, and using Him for partially gratuitous purposes. But then again, He knows your heart. Just confess your heart to Him, tell Him you didn’t mean any harm, you love Him, and if my wife, a mere human, can forgive some of the lousy things I have done over the years, then the Almighty can forgive you too. And thank the good Lord you didn’t use the term Allah in your blog and weren’t living someplace like Saudi Arabia.
I understand that even if our Lord does have a sense of humor, Allah (I’m referring to the Muslim Allah, since middle eastern Christians also refer to God as Allahah, singular of Elohim, same root as Eli, the name Jesus called the Father on the cross) doesn’t, and apparently he also has a short fuse to go along with it.
So God bless you and keep up the great stuff,
James Foard
Well, stealing a bunch of no war sign does sound funny, but joey d should probably e-mail Whittle anyway to make sure we got good feelings here in the blogosphere.
If i had an e-mail account i would, but i dont, so just tell him im messen with him, and i thought my computer froze so i clicked post a dozen times, not knowing that it would post it that many times “sorry bill”-Joey D
Frank, I re-thought it, and I just can’t go along with the crowd. I think you did come close to blasphemy. We can’t bring God down to our level and use Him as some parody, or put words in His mouth, even fictitiously, that parody Him. The Word says “Let no filthy communication proceed from your mouth.” This is so much more true for God. Your a remarkably gifted writer Frank, one who I believe God does want to use, and He also wants you to use your talents for His glory. So I have to say that confession might be the appropriate thing at this time. You’ve written some great stuff, your insight and wit are inspirational, but listen to “that still small voice” when you write and give Him glory,
James
it looks like im not the only one to have a joke taken out of context, i know u meant nothing about ur joke about J.C. (i dont want to say his name in vein)you wer just trying to make people laugh, and HE would smile upon you for your efforts to make people happy.
Stinki,
That James character suddenly got a little scary and mellow-dramatic – don’t listen to him.
Anyways, I was just talking to Jesus yesterday and he used that expression like 3 times! I know that’s over-doing it a bit but, he is trying to be more approachable and contemporary.
And For God’s sake, we could all give Him a break, American slang is pretty difficult to master, especially when a single day for Him is like millions of years for us. – he’ll find a nice middle ground soon! And He is God, He doesn’t need our help OR our judgement. (“let he who has no sin cast the first stone”- we all know who that “He” is- Jesus – so back the FK off!)
Just Remember, Mind- fk is just a word.
A FUNNY word – yes, it’s jovial, CONTEMPORARY, attention-grabbing, colorful, good-willed – and that’s the Jesus I know. Yep,It’s Jesus in a word.
With Love and Good Will,
James is right on. I wish I could’ve articulated my first thought that way. When you blaspheme the Lord you are playing with fire. Jesus does forgive all sins, but there IS one unforgivable sin, and that is blasphemy of the HOly Spirit. So, please think about it, please.
Mt.12:31-32
“Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”
Mk.3:29
“But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.”
Lk.12:10
“But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.”
Boy, these religious debates are like a drug or something. After this, I’m going cold turkey!
Anyway the scriptural tidbits Martin provides are completely out of context.
In Matthew 12:31-32, Jesus’ words are directed at Pharisees who charged that the Lord performed exorcisms through a pact with Satan. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit only happens when someone attributes God’s good works to SATAN. This is the ONLY unforgivable blasphemy, because it directly supports evil and denies the true history of God.
Blasphemy that is the result of misunderstandings of Jesus’ teachings, human error, or prejudice will always be forgiven:
Timothy 1: 13
I was once a blasphemer, a persecutor, a man filled with arrogance; but because I did not know what I was doing in my unbelief, I have been treated mercifully, and the grace of our Lord has been granted me in overflowing measure, along with the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.
(Quoted from my Catholic Bible, so I’m sure it doesn’t count with Martin.)
Frank BELIEVES in Jesus. He’s not speaking against the Holy Spirit. In fact, it is just the opposite.
Anyway, I’m not a religious fanatic, folks. I just like to read the entire CHAPTER before I quote a verse in the Bible. They teach us how to do that in “Caflic school.”
Yeah! What Fritz said!
Fritz, I’ve already told Frank that I was diggin’ on him about catholics, there are just as many christians in the catholic church as anywhere else. And there is no one definitive translation of the bible out there. Unless you can read hebrew or greek there is no way we can say who’s bible is the correct version, we just have to hope that GOd presents it to us in the way He wants us to see it. We all interpret the bible differently. Frank has already made a good step in the right direction but I hope he searches his conscience more about how he deals with the character of Jesus in the future.
“Interpeting” the bible is a far cry from taking random verses and using them to suit your own purposes. The verses you quote deal with a very specific form of blasphemy that is unforgivable by God. You have used the Word of God to pressure a young talent into censoring his work in order to keep from offending your personal sensibilities. You have taken a path of self-rightousness.
You accused someone of the worst form of blasphemy. I believe that you did so unjustly. You owe more than an apology to Frank. You have to answer to your own conscience.
Jesus was accused of blasphemy because he attributed devine properties to himself. Matthew points out that the Pharisees should have been able to recogonize that Jesus’ powers came from the Holy Spirit, yet they accused him of being in league with Satan. That cannot be compared to a young writer’s fictional account of a conversation with Christ.
I believe that by making this comparison you may have actually committed an offense similar to that of Pharasees. You are a Christain. Therefore, you should be able to distinguish between that which is truly the work of Satan and the satirical writings of a well-intentioned believer.
If you look at what Frank wrote through tolerant and understanding eyes — those of a Christian, you can clearly see an inspired message that has been written in contemporary language for a modern audience.
I think it is brilliant to write about those who doubt the validity of the Holocaust and use Jesus as the provocateur. It is this absurdity that gives impact to the work. This is true satire.
I believe that Christ’s teachings do help us when we are forced to deal with such issues. And, He would lead us to no other conclusion than to see such ideas as being laughable. I think the Lord would much rather have us use humor to support the truth than to stone neo-Nazi revisionists in the street. Think about it.
In 1988, Salmon Rushdie’s novel, Satanic Verses, offended faithful Muslims. Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini proclaimed the book a work of blasphemy and condemned Rushdie to death for “insulting Islam, the prophet Muhammed and the holy Koran.”
Because he was raised a Muslim, Rushdie was reviled by Muslims as an “apostate,” one who knows the truth and turns away from it. The traditional Muslim punishment for this is death. Rushdie still lives in hiding with a price on his head.
I think you will agree that Christians should be above the type of behavior exhibited by the Ayatollahs of the world.
I believe it is better to compare what Frank has written to Steven Vincent Benet’s The Devil and Daniel Webster and similar literary works that may be “challenging” to those who hold strictly to biblical teachings. However, because the message is just and good, these works should be tolerated and even encouraged.
If Frank were a minister, teaching his flock that Jesus actually used the word “mindf**k,” I think you could safely accuse him of being a blasphemer. But, his blog entry was clearly presented as a work of fantasy.
Ditto to Fritz’s comments, plus this: The genius of Frank’s satire is his flair for ironic fiction. The Rumsfeld press conferences are funny because Rumsfeld doesn’t really shoot reporters. As a committed Catholic, it seems to me that Jesus saying “mind-fk” is funny because Jesus wouldn’t really say “mind-fk.”
Fritz,
If you read all my comments, I never accused Frank of the unforgivable sin. As a matter of fact in one of those scriptures it actually says that blaspheming Jesus will be forgiven(of course that also comes with a sincere repentance of the sin). I put those scriptures in there to show how grievous blasphemy can be. If it were me and I was writing satire, and I was “God-fearing”, I would stray away from using His Holy name in any irreverent matter as I would be “afraid” of commiting that unforgivable sin. Fritz, I don’t want Frank to censor himself, I just want him to think about what he is doing, to reach down in his “God-fearing” heart and ask himself if he would rather honor his creator with respect or use him as the brunt of a joke. To compare me to the ayatollah komeni is like comparing conservatives to nazis, which we all know is a liberal ploy. I am just a christian who saw a horrible mocking of my savior and found it highly offensive. As a christian to another christian, I find my comments more of a helping hand than a condemnation. Jesus finds pleasure in our worship not our funny internet bloggings.
Disagreeing to Disagree
It’s interesting how many bloggers who agree with Steven Den Beste on the topic of atheism disagree with me, even though there’s not the slightest practical difference between Den Beste’s atheism and mine. As I pointed out in a previous…
The issue is not whether atheism is a belief, but whether it is a RATIONAL belief.
Those who cannot understand what A=A means should not engage in mental jousting.
Those who cannot distinguish rational thoughts from brain farts are condemned to live a life “under God” – controlled by imaginary good and evil spirits, angels and devils, saints and sinners, heaven and hell, and ancient dietary rules. What a waste of human potential.
The Beste Theory of Atheism? (Part 2)
Steven Den Beste originally objected to my form of “proof atheism” on the ground that it didn’t account for every meaningless, hypothetical, apathetic deistic non-Christian God of the Philosophers. He chided me for too strongly equating …
The Beste Theory of Atheism? (Part 2)
Steven Den Beste originally objected to my form of “proof atheism” on the ground that it didn’t account for every meaningless, hypothetical, apathetic deistic non-Christian God of the Philosophers. He chided me for too strongly equating “God” with the …
Disagreeing to Disagree
It’s interesting how many bloggers who agree with Steven Den Beste on the topic of atheism disagree with me, even though there’s not the slightest practical difference between Den Beste’s atheism and mine. As I pointed out in a previous post, Den Beste…
3576 How can this all be right? Check out my site http://www.pai-gow-keno.com