Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ the Qur’an

Today’s Jseus and Mo strip, called “glory”, was clearly inspired by the Manchester bombing, and came with the email message: “The Koran is surely the most overrated book in the history of literature.”

There’s nothing to say here except that maybe Dawkins was wrong: perhaps it’s Allah, not the God of the Old Testament, who is the most odious character in fiction.


  1. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 24, 2017 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    Mo has toilet paper?

  2. darrelle
    Posted May 24, 2017 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    That is way too profoundly unsophisticated.

  3. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted May 24, 2017 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    The Koran is all written by one single writer with a unified point of view.

    The Old Testament has about 20 hands in it with widely ranging conceptions of deity, from the genocidal God of the the J writer, to the nurturing maternal deity of the 2nd part of Isaiah (written by someone different than the first part).

    Yes, I think, RD was definitely wrong there.
    (I made this same point about a week ago at much greater length.)

    • Posted May 24, 2017 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

      The Koran is all written by one single writer with a unified point of view.

      Is it? I mean, I know that the tradition is that it was, but the real historical book? Call me sceptical.

      I also think your estimate for the number of writers of the Jewish Bible is an underestimate.

      • JonLynnHarvey
        Posted May 24, 2017 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

        The origin of the Koran is actually a matter of some controversy. Fred Donner’s “Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing” is supposed to provide a strong argument for the traditional understanding of the Koran’s origins, while the pseudonymous Christoph Luxembourg argues the opposite in “The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Qur’an”

        BUT, my main point stands.
        There is a strong argument that there are at least a dozen different conceptions of God in the Old Testament with different authors actually “correcting” previous ones, and such an evident disparity is not to be found in the Koran although the latter is actually a bit opaque.

        I believe I meant to say/type 30 for Old Testament authors.

      • somer
        Posted May 24, 2017 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

        There are accounts during his lifetime of Mohammeds existence by Christians but the Quran reads like fragments – and its orthodox form was supposedly compiled by the third Caliph Uthman. Not till 100 and more years after the death of the prophet did hadith and accounts of Mohammed’s life similar to todays Musim scriptures begin to appear and its thought (by non muslim scholars) the hadith elaborating on the Quran began to be written and compiled from about 80 years after his death. Sunni hadith are supposedly originally accounts about Mohammed and what he approved of by those who knew him, and sometimes the sayings of his close and pious companions. Though some are from the Prophet Gabriel. Shia hadith are mostly from the family of Ali, Mohammed’s nephew and son in law, and third caliph (uthman was fourth not third). As the 8thCentury (AD) muslims encountered ongoing fierce resistance from Christians in Turkey and western Iran they collected hadith about holy war and the idea of a Land of Islam and Peace versus a Land of Unbelief and War. The account that was written by the faithful about Mohammed’s life (the sirat) emphases him fighting incessantly from the Medinian period on and the more bellicose passages in the quran were held to come from this period and to supersede the non bellicose passages in importance. (Tom Holland In the Shadow of the Sword)

        • somer
          Posted May 24, 2017 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

          But Yahweh and Allah and even Jesus in parts of the New Testament though much less graphically so – are all cut from the same cloth – violent vain, imperial, bloodthirsty. Just to my mind, theres more of it and its more explicit in Islam

        • Posted May 26, 2017 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

          I see unity in the Koran. I vote for a single author, who of course stole lavishly from here and there, but subjected the whole thing to a chilling red line of subjugation and domination. Even the apparent contradictions of the Koran are traceable to the transition between the “Mecca verses” (still weak, tries to present himself as good to have followers) and “Medina verses” (triumphant, no longer needs to pose as good).

          • somer
            Posted May 27, 2017 at 5:19 am | Permalink

            I think it was one author or record from one author but it doesnt read as something written in one go. I agree some themes are constant – like the sheer amount of verses (more than half) addressed to castigating or threatening unbelievers/nonmuslims/heretics – on almost every page and often the bulk of a given page and the sheer amount of references to hell either directly e.g. “doom” or “a grievous punishment from god” etc on pretty much every page.

      • somer
        Posted May 24, 2017 at 11:35 pm | Permalink

        The Koran is all written by one single writer with a unified point of view.

        Is it? I mean, I know that the tradition is that it was, but the real historical book? Call me sceptical.
        True but it doesnt matter because unless the clerics and the particular school one belongs to are followed in the basics of the religion its DEATH – as prescribed in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim – “if a Muslim lose his religion then kill him”. The Shaafi Guidance of the Traveller prescribes death for the slightest infraction that is in any way publicly announced – it gives as one of various examples – laughing about the requirement that muslims must daily brush their teeth (originally with the stick from a suitable tree,forget its name)

  4. David Evans
    Posted May 24, 2017 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    To be fair, the Qur’an commands believers to fight the unbelievers until they submit to Allah. Not good, but better than Yahweh’s frequent commands to exterminate an enemy tribe (sparing, sometimes, the virgin girls) and show no mercy.

    • somer
      Posted May 24, 2017 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

      In Islam – according to the hadith and orthodox law of the four Sunni schools the Muslim commander on conquering infidels in an infidel land has a choice depending what he thinks will most benefit the Muslims. If a whole land or large territory is conquered and annexed as an Islamic land the infidels (if Jews, Christians or Sabeans or Zoroastrians) are made into dhimmi paying special tax and according to the Quran and subsequent practice “Made to feel themselves subdued”. If they rebel they can be enslaved or killed. If not the specified type of infidels most schools (except Hanifa) say they should all be slaughtered. Most of the conquest of India was by Hanifa plus there were simply too many Indians (and they fought bravely) and it was too big. Sometimes the Muslims boasted in old testament/Tanakh language about their exploits – “we noised our conquest” and “we killed until we left nothing that breathed”. At any rate, the Islamic commander who has not conquered a whole land has a choice of four things. He can leave them free but paying tribute, he can ransom the captives, he can enslave the captives, or he can kill them. Most often the men and old women would be killed and the women enslaved.

    • somer
      Posted May 24, 2017 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

      Yahweh does not command jews (or Christians) to conquer or kill all unbelievers. The exterminations/enslavements refer to specific cities. Jesus is though referred to as in the future ruling over (presumably all) the nations with a rod. Islam Demands that there be perpetual war conducted on non muslims until the day of resurrection. Various sources but clearest in the Hideya collection of the Islamic laws but this is orthodox across schools

  5. rickflick
    Posted May 24, 2017 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    Say no more.

  6. Benjay
    Posted June 8, 2017 at 11:06 pm | Permalink

    My Wife was watching a film about Princess Diana. I walked in as she quoted this book. The actress, not my Wife. Pirate lore is good reading. Christians going renegadoe, etc, teaching people how to sail.

    Religion is hard knocks boy, I grew up like DeNiro, my old man…did his own thing, small town, big city.

    His mom and my mom from same neighbourhood.
    It all stinks. Sorry Bob.

    Robert Anton Wilson said, “Mutate toward a funnier, more hopeful reality map” and he met everyone where they stood, he was wonderful.

    He said to, in the video, but I like toward

    I am a better word stylist than RAW.
    When I need to sell a part, like Cashin Delaney,
    I think of Bob, calling me names. DeNiro, of course.
    RAW was too honest to act! He was himself.

    The Bobs want us to beat them at the game.
    Entertain them. Funnier writing. Better acting out.
    Make America better. One understanding at a time.
    Thru Film.

    Make drive-ins great again?
    Robert Joseph Vila for President!

    Bob for President.

One Trackback/Pingback

  1. […] […]

%d bloggers like this: