History of religion

[Major Nikon]

[guillaumeb]

1. How insightful.

And just as insightful as the first time this silliness was posted.

[MineralMan]

5. It's the first time I've seen it.

It's funny. But, clearly, you are offended in some way that someone has posted something you don't care for in a public discussion area. Offended enough to post a reply complaining that someone did that.

How interesting...and informative in a strange way.

The thing is that it's actually a pretty accurate representation of the history of religion.

[guillaumeb]

6. It appeals to your own views.

So it is not surprising that you find it accurate.

[MineralMan]

7. Yes, but not to yours...

[guillaumeb]

8. It is simplistic.

And not particularly insightful.

[MineralMan]

9. You have convinced yourself of that, I agree.

It lacks details, but follows the process well enough. It is a comic strip, not an apologia.

Again,

[guillaumeb]

10. That "lacks details" is an accurate way to condemn it.

And the supposed "logic" that it derives from.

[MineralMan]

11. You are amusing, Monsieur B.

Please do continue...

[guillaumeb]

12. You are predictable.

Mais, ce qui rassenble, s'assemble, non?

[MineralMan]

13. I'm not familiar with the word: rassenble

[guillaumeb]

15. Excusez moi. A bas mon ordi.

rassemble.

[MineralMan]

14. Did you mean:

Ce qui se ressemble s'assemble?

In English:
Birds of a feather flock together.

Spelling, Monsieur B.

L'orthographe est importante pour le sens.

[guillaumeb]

16. Z'etes parfait, vous?

[MineralMan]

17. Nope. Not perfect.

But French is not my first language, so I can't readily detect and correct misspellings in French. It took me a few minutes on Google to figure out what idiomatic expression you were trying to use. As it turned out, it was a waste of my time, since it was inanely irrelevant. But, never mind.

[guillaumeb]

18. I remember your outraged reaction when I pointed out one of your mispellings.

[MineralMan]

19. Do you? Show me, then...

Tu quoque? C'est pour rire, vraiment.

Je m'amuse...

[guillaumeb]

20. Encore, z'etes parfait, vous?

J'ai mon propre opinion.

[MineralMan]

21. No. I think of myself as a sundae.

Not every sundae is a parfait, but some are.

[guillaumeb]

22. On Saturday?

Plus proprement, un amuse bouche.

D'accord?

[Cartoonist]

24. What's to condemn?

The piece is historically accurate. You may not like it, but you can't challenge it.

What "logic" are you talking about? And what do you mean derives from?

As a self proclaimed expert on comics, I see an artist who has studied history and has encapsulated all of religion into a tier of panels easily understood by all but the most obtuse.

[guillaumeb]

29. Yes, easily understood....

as promoting a simplistic world view.

[Major Nikon]

23. History itself lacks detail

We just don't know that much about primitive religion prior to recorded history which started about 5,000 yrs ago. However we do know some types of religion predated monotheism for a period at least as long as monotheism has been around. Ironically the vast majority of modern religionists will condemn these early forms of religion as idolatry and heretical, yet still manage to get their feelings hurt when someone points out the irrationality with their chosen imaginary friends. Funny how that works.

Meanwhile nature worship predates Christianity by thousands of years and assuming some form of religion with persist will almost certainly still be around long after the bible is on the ash heap of history.

[Act_of_Reparation]

25. It's a joke.

That you're so upset about it speaks to its incisiveness. Laughing along with it would have been the better PR move. Your audience is gonna be disappointed.

[Major Nikon]

28. It sounded better in his head

[guillaumeb]

30. Cartoonist disagrees. eom

[edhopper]

2. Thanks for posting

I have not seen this before.

[msongs]

3. oh dear the cartoon doesn't mention the vast multitudes murdered by religionists nt

[Major Nikon]

4. Doesn't mention children still being raped either

Thanks to religion and its religionist apologists. At least we can be thankful for those offering their “counterpoint” as insight to the real problems with the Chinese atheists.

[RedParrot]

26. Engels on religion

Excerpt: Christianity was originally a movement of oppressed people: it first appeared as the religion of slaves and emancipated slaves, of poor people deprived of all rights, of peoples subjugated or dispersed by Rome. Both Christianity and the workers' socialism preach forthcoming salvation from bondage and misery; Christianity places this salvation in a life beyond, after death, in heaven; socialism places it in this world, in a transformation of society.

Frederick Engels
On the History of Early Christianity (1894)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894/early-christianity/index.htm

[flying_wahini]

27. I find it accurate and amusing, too.

Christians sure think everyone should believe as they do.

[gtar100]

31. Pathetically over simplistic.

Unless you believe all humans prior to modern science were stupid. Thankfully many researchers, anthropologists and archeologists are no longer following the stereotype that we are smarter than our ancestors. Considering we're the ones making an utter mess of our only water, our only sky, our only land and stealing the resources of this planet from our children to live as we do, the stereotype just seems a bit more like a projection. It's even over-simplistic in its depiction of religion. It reflects the worst of how *modern* humans view religion, not those of ancient or prehistoric people.

[Major Nikon]

32. Simplicity is a significant part of the point you are missing

It also doesn't imply prehistoric humans were more stupid than today. It actually implies exactly the opposite. Meanwhile primitive humans most certainly weren't better about managing their resources. In pretty much every regard they were worse. There just wasn't as many of them.

[Voltaire2]

33. Huh? It portrays religiosity as consistently

stupid. How do you get that is was more stupid earlier out of that comic?

Oh wait, you think worshiping rocks is idiotic but worshiping magic sky beings isn’t?

[NeoGreen]

34. At least the rocks exist in reality and can be seen...

...so maybe the word/concept that is being discussed is not 'stupidity' but 'gullibility', and if so, our prehistoric ancestors have us beat, hands down.