Frazz by Jef Mallett for January 04, 2012

I’m sorry he gets on my nerves.

Rene, yeah. He deserves a time out…It’s time to explore some other characters…We need a couple more teachers, too. Hey! Jeff!

FINALLY! Someone else agrees. Caulfield is a smart kid but he’s quickly becoming an annoying smart -ss.

Why has he had the same teacher for the past 4 years?

The meaning of AD is Anno Domini or Year of our Lord referring to the year of Christ’s birth. The meaning of BC is Before Christ. If BC is before Christ and AD is after death there would be a gap of 30 years or so during his life that would not be accounted for.

Thanks Sharuniboy. And continuing on, Jesus was not actually born in mid winter. Restructuring of the Christian calendar moved the date of his birth to coincide with other pagan mid winter festivals. The date is a matter of convenience, not historical fact.

… and actually, Biblical scholars will also attest that the year of his death is also likely wrong as well.

Scientific scholars will attest he probably never even existed at all… except in fairy tales.

“scientific scholars” do not require courtroom level evidence to draw conclusions – there isn’t any for millennial-old events. These folks evaluate the available information, taking into account the likely motivations and situations of the recorders of the information. The consensus conclusion appears to be that yes, a person with a radical message did live, speak and act in the region of the present Israel around 30-35 AD. Whether this person was “the Christ” is a matter of personal belief. As it always has been. “Scientific scholars” do not address such beliefs.

Back to the cartoon: So what about a ‘bank holiday’ for old homework? I want to know what problems 3-9, 11, 14, 17-21, and 24 are. Maybe we could substitute some others for Caulfield.

And BTW, if you think Caulfield is a smart-ass, it might suggest that you have trouble with all the kids who see through the facade of “proper behavior.” I found that the smartest kids were the ones who pushed the intellectual bounds, and I enjoyed sparing with them most.

Hey, Jay Warner do you mean "sparing with them " as in spare the rod and spoil the child?

Can “personal beliefs” based on fairy tales hold a candle to the scientific method?What do you think, Caulfield?

For those of us non-Christians, which is a major part of the world population, doesn’t it seem a little conceited?

There is a difference between scientific scholars and atheist propagandists. Before funding was possible, most scientists were clergy, doctors, or nobility – simply because they had flexible enough schedules to permit the research without being fired. Professors were the segue to the professional scientist. Thomas Huxley pointed out that the existence of God can neither be proven nor falsified by the scientific method, so use science for that which can be proven or falsified and faith for that which cannot.

Like you, I consider myself an agnostic. When people ask me why I’m not an agnostic, not an atheist, my reply is it takes much too much faith to be an atheist. Surprisingly the only person who understood my answer was a Evangical Christian.

GatoCat: I never claimed an excluded middle. I personally know and have worked with both kinds on issues of mutual interest.

It was Thomas Huxley who coined the term “agnostic” meaning what what I described above and Night-Gaunt underlined. Unfortunately, some anonymous people, never willing to let a good term remain, seem to have defined it as “Duh, I don’t know if God exists or not.” Remember Huxley’s sotto voce comment in the debate with Soapy Wilburforce. It seems both abolitionist William Wilburforce and Thomas Huxley had nephews who sullied the family name.

Yes, SHE’S the one who started down that slippery slope!

I am simultaneously annoyed and amused by atheists who assert unequivocally that there is no god. That is no less dogmatic than the blind assertion that god exists. Faith is belief in that which is inherently unprovable; that’s why it’s called faith and not knowledge. I think the only rational response is agnosticism. Mind you, I do believe in god(s), but I can’t really know, and refuse to state my beliefs as fact.