Chapter 5: Lit, page 48.

Chapter 5: Lit, page 48.

If you read this comic via Google Reader, now is the time to press the Like button because this is the page you want strangers to see.

Fact.


Discussion (66)¬

  1. Owen says:

    (Sun)glasses and full-on Egyptian garb just go together so brilliantly.

  2. Salvar says:

    I think this guy came to my university once…

    • Carl-E says:

      Anyone who went to college almost anywhere in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois in the 80′s and 90′s knows Brother Max. I’d swear this was him – dressed better, mind you, but all that’s missing is the speaking in tongues!

  3. Niall says:

    Is that their selling point? “When no other god will jerk off over you, Atum will.”

  4. ColdFrog says:

    Something about this scene strikes me as weirdly genuine – not just because I think this is how people these days react to the local extravagant religious advocates, but because it just feels like this is how people would have reacted throughout time, and the historical perspective this particular cult is going for bridges the gap between the ancient onlookers and the modern bystanders, all gaping, hooting and provoking in one timeless, touristy moment. Long live the street spectacle!

  5. DCB says:

    yah know…some gods duke it out via lightning in the skies…others attempt to drown one another in rivers of divine semen.

    • Hanna says:

      Have to wonder if maybe he’s not translating that in his mind from his native language.. ..then again the wording might be even more corny.

  6. Mary says:

    He really takes the “my God is bigger than your God” argument to a new level, doesn’t he.

    • C. Mage says:

      (HISTORICAL EXPOSITION WARNING)
      That’s an argument older than you know. The plagues of Egypt in the Bible were specifically designed to challenge the domains of the Egyptian gods, basically saying, “If the gods of Egypt are truly sovereign, let them stop the God of Abraham from doing the equivalent of taking a dump on their dinner table.”
      First off, the rod turning into a snake. The cobra was considered a mark of royalty, yet this scruffy Hebrew turned his staff into one. When the Pharoah’s men did the same, Moses’ snake ate the others.
      Second, the turning the Nile to blood and killing all the fish. Direct affront to Hapi, the spirit of the Nile, as well as Hatmeyt, goddess of fish.
      Third, the plague of frogs, directed against Hekt, the frog-headed goddess of fertility, who couldn’t stop the fertility of the frogs.
      Fourth, the plague of lice and the plague of insects, a twofer against Khephera, a scarab-headed god.
      Fifth, the plague on the livestock, a jab at Hathor, the cow-headed goddess of fertility, a favorite of Rameses, BTW
      Sixth, the plague of boils, an affront to Sekhment, goddes of healing, and Im-Hotep.
      Seventh, the plague of hail, a direct insult to the sky goddess Nut, who was supposed to protect the Egyptians from skyborne destruction.
      Eighth, the plague of locusts, another twofer against Senehem, locust-headed god, and Ra, since the cloud of lucusts was so thick it blotted out the sun.
      Ninth, the plague of darkness, not only against Amon-Ra, but Ramses referred to himself as “son of the sun”.
      Finally, the killing of the firstborn. Not only did it spit in the face of Osiris, god of life and death, but it combined the deaths of both man and animal, from the Pharoah’s son to the lowliest bull. In short, Yahweh didn’t pull punches when it came to discrediting other gods, which is kinda what’s happening here, only with the “panhasi” being on the receiving end.

      • HippehPanda says:

        You are a fucking genius, C. Mage, and I am in love with you.

      • Ringshadow says:

        Wow, that is amazing.

        So what you’re basically saying is a religion that made “I am your only god” one of its ten big laws has to acknowledge another group of gods if only to diss them soundly? Wow, just wow.

        • C. Mage says:

          Actually, there’s a difference between BEING God and acknowledging a god. When God says “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me,” he’s saying, “Don’t put other things that are of this world higher than me.” In other words, don’t put a higher importance on things like sex, money, your job, hobbies, recreation, anything that would make you choose that over obeying God. If you spend all your time on something and ignore God, you are in a very real sense “worshipping” that something. It all depends on what you’re devoted to, whether it’s that corner office, having too much fun with a different person every week, or a block of stone or wood that looks like a person with an animal’s head.

          • Spencer says:

            Actually, from my own limited Biblical and historical knowledge, I think everybody was polytheistic back then. When God says “have no other gods before me” he means it both figuratively and literally. He never says no other gods exist, he just wants you to know he’s better.

          • C. Mage says:

            (THEOLOGICAL STATEMENT WARNING)
            The only problem with that situation is when you’ve got so many other pantheons with their own Creation myths, they’re all in conflict. Who’s the real fertility goddess, who truly rules the sea, the land, the sky, who’s the real god of war, of nature? In the Bible, God goes on in several occasions about condemning those who follow graven images and idols. In Christianity, there is only the Most High and the Almighty.
            Some other food for thought: when you have many gods, that means you decide who to pay homage to; so if you want to get laid, you pray to Venus, to win a war, you pray to Ares or Thor or Tlaloc. You only pray to the other gods if you have oher needs. The basis for this is so you pray to the god YOU choose to get what YOU want, so you’re making the gods follow YOU. God is different; He’s sovereign, He’s in control and you have the choice to follow Hm and obey Him alone, or go and do your own thing. But when you follow God, it’s all about Him, not about you.

          • t3h fake says:

            I don’t see the distinction. They had to keep Ares happy or their city will be conquered. They had to keep Venus happy or their love life would be a trainwreck. They had to keep all the gods happy all the time or bad things would happen. They had to live right all the time, they couldn’t just turn the gods on and off like a faucet.

            In christianity you have to keep your god happy by assuring him he is your god and telling him how great he is and apologizing all the time for doing things he doesn’t like even though he knows its impossible to please him or else after you die he will torture you forever. Your god’s so hard to please he has to torture someone else in your place just to blow off steam.

        • t3h fake says:

          These plagues did the opposite of acknowledging the Egyptian gods. The plagues were to show that the Egyptian gods did not exist. It’s a sketchy argument though, like saying the Holocaust proved the god of the Jews doesn’t exist.

          Also, God didn’t give Moses the 10 commandments until after the plagues, so really even if Moses thought other gods were real it would have been OK.

        • C. Mage says:

          Not sure we’re talking about the same thing. With the gods of mythology, the people who made them put their values on them. Ares was vicious, Zeus was a unrepentant womanizer, Athena saw Poseidon raping one of her preistesses and figured, “Hey it’s her fault, so I’ll punish her. Hey, she was asking for it.” In Christianity, God doesn’t lie, doesn’t go back on Hs Word and never says anything carelessly. God doesn’t condemn you for not being perfect. All He wants you to do is three things: accept Jesus as your personal Savior, accept God as sovereign and obey Him and to love others as you would yourself. Everybody’s going to fall short, and He knows that, and He forgives us even before we need to be forgiven. All we need to do is repent and do our best not to do it again.

          In any case, this discussion is getting far beyond its original intent. For the sake of those who might be put off by a discussion like that, if anyone wants to continue this discussion, the email link is there if you want it.

      • Dreaming Pixel says:

        Thanks for the info C Mage! That is one fascinating and detailed list.
        On another note, I’m pretty sure there are Sumerian legends that also have to do with celestial spunk, as a representation of floodwaters.
        Not that that would make the threat of a God killing you that way any less amusing for the non-believers.

      • Lissa Quon says:

        Also in the sense of the Egyptian mythology ones seed seemed to be power. Unless I am remembering mythology incorrectly where Horus and Set tried to assert dominance to win the throne. It ended up being resolved partially due to god spunk.

        Set actually raped Horus but Horus managed to catch the fluids in question and thus not lose face, and Horus spiked Set’s favorite lettuce garden with his own fluids and thus humiliated Set.

        So yea, odd ramble aside I can see Atum’s spunk being used as an illustration of power, it fits really well rather than just the usual “and my god smash you!”

        • Hanna says:

          Thanks for the additional info, Lissa. I’m more familiar with the shenanigans of the Greek Pantheon, but right now feel like I might have fun reading about the Egyptian one too. . . XD

      • Amarikah says:

        Good sir, please inform us of where you learned all of this and more about the mythology of the Egyptian gods. There were 3-4 gods there that I hadn’t heard of at all. Any book or site references? My love of history begs you.

        • C. Mage says:

          I did a lot of reading as a kid…and a young adult…and as an adult….and I still do. Book reading, although I sometimes check Wikipedia if I need something in a hurry and the entry has quantifiable references. Yes, I would likely win a lot of money in a game show and yes, I am smarter than a fifth grader.

        • C. Mage says:

          As for the references, check out this book: The Gods and Symbols of Ancient Egypt (Manfred Lurker, Thames and Hudson, 1980).

          • soof says:

            Hey, I didn’t find the reply button in your other post, so my answer goes here: As far as I have been informed, the forms of “thou shalt” are to be translated by a simple future- if you accept me as your God then you won’t etc…
            And it has been discussed that this part aknowledges right away the existence of other gods, the point being that they are not “your Gods” and you don’t follow their rules.
            Remeber the prophet Elia getting his God in a fight against Baal. His existence is herewith confirmed, you are just not supposed to sacrifice him your first-born.

          • C. Mage says:

            Point of order, though. If Baal did exist, why didn’t he respond to Elijah’s challenge?

            Bit of background on the challenge: In 1 Kings, Chapter 18, Elijah proposes a direct test of the powers of Baal and Yahweh. The people of Israel, 450 prophets of Baal, and 400 prophets of Asherah are summoned to Mount Carmel. Two altars are built, one for Baal and one for Yahweh. Wood is laid on the altars. Two oxen are slaughtered and cut into pieces; the pieces are laid on the wood. Elijah then invites the priests of Baal to pray for fire to light the sacrifice.
            They pray from morning to noon without success. Elijah then ridicules their efforts. They respond by cutting themselves and adding their own blood to the sacrifice (such mutilation of the body was strictly forbidden in the Mosaic law, since the spilling of blood desecrates holy ground). They continue praying until evening without so much as a flicker of flame.
            Elijah’s turn. Not satisfied with just doing things simple he orders that the altar of the Yahweh be drenched with water from “four large jars” poured three times (1 Kings 18:33-34), which equals twelve, a number of significance in Christianity. The water pours over the bull, the wood, and even fills a trench dug around the altar. He asks God to accept the sacrifice.
            God rains down fire, turns the sacrifice and the wood to ash and completely dehydrates the trench.

            And THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is a pretty powerful argument for the non-existence of Baal.

          • Hanna says:

            Actually it was proven (in a “let’s replicate mystical miracles” show which’s name I’ve forgotten) than most of what was poured on wasn’t water but whatever they called basically petrol back in those days, and what was water, reacted with some of the “sand” which in actuality was ground-up chemical I can’t remember, but its reaction with water gave out enough heat so as to light up the flammable liquid, which would then burn the wood.

            Of course there’s nothing saying this was exactly what happened, but based on the level of science and knowledge of those days, it was entirely plausible. Also handily there would have been enough pause between pouring the last of the “water” (very last part actually being water) and the chemical ignition, for him to shout out a few prayers and then let miracles happen. :-P

          • C. Mage says:

            Okay, for the sake of argument, let’s posit that Elijah was somehow able to get flammable chemicals on short notice that didn’t actually look like oil or flammable chemicals, and that he was somehow able to sneak that past the crowd of people watching this spectacle.

            Fire from Heaven?

            I’m not entirely certain Elijah had access to an orbital laser…

      • PhoenixInfynity says:

        …wow. Talk about contrapasso! Thank you for enlightening us; I have been hearing that story all my life without knowing the specific significance of the plagues!

  7. Jerry says:

    It’s 6:40am here and that first panel woke me RIGHT up. I actually jumped a little.

  8. AstroZamboni says:

    When he mentioned Atum on the last page, my thought was “Is she going there? I hope she’s going there!”

    Of COURSE you went there.

  9. Static Air says:

    Whenever gods and spunk are mentioned in the same sentence, there’s fun to be had.

    I just “liked” this, so I hope I wake someone up with this interesting page today, Spike. Good times!

  10. norm says:

    I hope Reagan’s in the crowd because I bet he would absolutely love this show. Way more fun than the Jakes, even.

  11. C. Mage says:

    It’s always interesting to note the cultural and historical differences between the world of Templar and this world. In the world of Templar, apparently, Egypt didn’t end up as a piece of property, it’s “god-kings” as vassals to empires like Rome and Persia…at least not until much later, since it seems Egypt is now occupied by the Jews. Poetic justice, considering how the Jews were once the property of the Egyptians. Food for thought.

  12. Brigid Keely says:

    1) I don’t know exactly it is about this page, but I love the artwork.

    2) I sincerely hate the gaping sneering crowd in the second panel. Seriously.

  13. AlmostLiterally says:

    “Your formless, muttering cough of a God will drown in the Divine spunk of Atum!…Now, I have some pamphlets to hand out – next Thursday is our annual potluck supper…”

  14. Wood says:

    There needs to be a Nile revivalist chick tract with the spunk of Atum drowning the formless muttering Abrahamic god.

  15. Joelle says:

    Are the Nile Revivalists supposed to be the part of the “unnumbered” that the Jakes have a hate-on for? I remember noticing during Feather’s spiel that “Middle Eastern” wasn’t in the list of first, second etc. man. The way they speak gives me the impression there is one group of people that they don’t consider human. I wonder if Jakes are going to show up to this sermon. Or Cook family. Or maybe it’s just good old Tuesday!

    • Minivet says:

      Most race analyses, to the extent they mean anything, say Middle Easterners are basically Caucasians. The Census has the same outlook. So I imagine they’re Third Man, especially if they took their divisions from books on race in the first half of the 20th century as Feather implied.

      And since when do the Jakes not like “unnumbered”? I thought they wanted to be off the grid, “someplace nice and green and unnumbered.”

      If asked, the Jakeskin would probably say Nile Revivalists not essentially different from the rest of what Jake rejected – their ideal world is based on cities just as ours is.

      • Slothrop, T. says:

        ‘middle eastern’ is a modern political term used to simplify what is historically maybe the most complex region on the globe. It is a crossroads of empires, cultures, and various peoples from diverse regions. Technically, Egyptians are African. Jews and Arabs are Semitic. Persians and Turks are technically Asian. In the Caucasus region above Turkey, well, there are Caucasians, go figure. The variations of overt race in these regions is subtle and difficult to categorize in an absolute manner, seeing that there has been so much exchange of control through war and trade by countless empires and principalities and numerous religions. I believe a thorough study of genetics would produce traces of Negro, Caucasian, Semitic, and Mongoloid to varying degrees amongst the geographical populations. All these racial types have the potential to be represented to different degrees in different regions of what we may consider the “middle east”.
        As for the 1st.-5th Man model, I suggest you look up M. Blavatsky and the Theosophists and their ‘Root Races of Men’. I suspect the Jakes’ five races is a sort of variation on this concept, albeit simplified.

  16. Carl-E says:

    I love the details – especially the moon suspended between the horns of the ox, and that poor girl keeping the ox in line with the apples… great touch!

  17. im_3lizab3th says:

    When i first read, I thought it said “Unshaven goatherds of Canada”, then proceeded to literally fall out of my chair laughing. (I’m lucky my classmates already think I’m utterly insane, or someone might have thought I was hysterical)

    Then I read through the comments, got confused over why no one had bothered to mention the bearded Canadian sheperd thing, then reread it and laughed again.

    Though now that I think of it, why didn’t the whole Canada thing confuse me?.?..

  18. Galindorf says:

    OMG it’s the Old Navy Preacher Man!

  19. …”Shep”? We named the elephant “Shep”.

  20. jimbo says:

    One of the highest compliments I can give a comic is that it is Kirby-esque. That first panel surely is.

  21. Hanna says:

    I am so going to have to post the URL of this page on my blog when I next write something there.. ..too good a chance to miss. XD

  22. Kurt says:

    I like the look on the face of the priestess(?) feeding the cow. All “Oh man, there he goes again…”

  23. Jenny Islander says:

    I wonder whether Templar got the bitter old homechurch-fundie version of Nile Revivalism and if you went to an equivalent venue in (say) Yakima you would get “Hathor loves you! Let’s dance and sing and have a potluck!” (And a priesthood that wasn’t one guy and his relatives.) But of course those people are practically panahasi.

  24. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by David Forbes, krank23. krank23 said: http://templaraz.com/?p=1528 awesome. [...]

  25. sushijones says:

    Diggin’ the sistrum. I also like how the girl on the left is clearly just waiting for the end of the sermon so she can slack off for the rest of the day.

Comment¬