cartoon: a reformed birth
Leave a Reply
Trackback URL
http://www.nakedpastor.com/archives/2390/trackback
-
artist. cartoonist. teacher.
-
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
David Hayward,
You are a serious glutton for punishment!
Seriously, are you trying to stir the religious masses into a frenzy?!
Smiles and Blessings to you…~mp:)
BTW- how’s your wife doing with her education?
Hah!
And she is acing her way through. I’m awfully proud. Thanks for asking.
David
I think Lisa will need a massage after seeing this Cartoon. You almost made me spray my coffee on the screen.
Denise thinks you need a follow up.
oh my…
Looks like David’s decided to play it safe and lay low…
Have to admit I laughed out loud…strange mixture of shock, humor, and a host of other undecipherable emotions…
LMAO,
Every religious spirit for miles around should soon descend like a horde of banshees.
Sir,
Yikes!
(But really, really funny.)
Yours,
Lee
Love it, but I know folk who won’t. Their loss.
Ahahahaa, that’s superb.
Our baby is due in 3 months. I hope he/she has such a cunning wit.
It is God that the gesture is made towards.
You are on a serious roll. Boy, I can’t wait for the comments on THIS one!
glad i dropped by today – best one yet (for me anyway)…it’s sure to keep me smiling all day…later bro.
It’s a lefty! Sinister Minister.
lol
ya, it’s a girl too!
I must be dense because I don’t get it. Not that I don’t think it’s funny, I just don’t understand what it’s referring to. Anyone care to explain? I’ve seen quite a few pictures of babies coming out or just out who are flipping a bird.
Is the guy in the suit a pastor? A Reformed pastor? A doctor? Is the baby flipping off the guy, or life in general? Is the baby Reformed?
I’m feeling very dense right now.
Pastor,you do have balls….I laughed while I worked today after seeing this earlier in the morning….almost out loud and you wdn’t believe how that wd look
Judas had ball, too.
fishon
just a thot…a little more on the serious side David…is this a comment on the particular doctrine?…is the Reformed deformed?
Judas? Come on, fishon.
David, what the heck were you thinking??
Oh, never mind.
fishon I’m still lol……….
Very funny!
C’mon Fishon, lighten up!
Joe
out of the mouth of babes…so to speak
Add me to the “spraying my coffee on the monitor” crowd. David, you are bold, and I commend you. But then again, I have a nasty word in the very title of my blog.
Now why did my blog have to go and pingback to the comments section here just because I provided a link to this cartoon, and provide an idiotic “comment” that only leads to my blog?
David, please feel free to delete that annoying thing and this comment too, which would be pointless if and when you get rid of it.
“Bold!” Why would you call it bold?
To be bold it would have to be something that we who particapate on this blog would not expect.
fishon
After the blowback that actually caused him to issue a “turn in your sense of humor” cartoon after a “turn in your brains” one…to post something quite this…um…in the face is something I’d call bold.
It’s no surprise that David has opinions, but even by his standards I’d say that this cartoon is a bit more risque than his usual.
It’s no surprise that David has opinions, but even by his standards I’d say that this cartoon is a bit more risque than his usual.(Deacon)
I guess David is growing in his faith
Deacon Blue,
At some point it is calling down fire upon yourself.
I believe it is the love of chaos, not boldness.
But then, each to his/her own.
fishon
fishon…it would also help if this weren’t a written medium. I think highly of David’s cartoon, but I wasn’t lifting him up as a “symbol of courage”…my “bold” comment would have spoken with a little shake of my head and just a tone of “you’re going to get it, you know…”
So lest you think I’m in awe of him or something…I just thought it was funny and that it was amusing as well that he would open himself up to more potshots so soon.
I hardly think he’s an agent of chaos, though.
Deacon,
Ah, I understand. Thanks for sitting me straight.
When I say chaos, I mean I think he likes to bring controversy on purpose–which in the pass has raised more than a little chaos on this site. Surely he knew he would raise the hair on the dog, though it didn’t materalize like he thought it might.
MAKE IT a great weekend
fishon
to be honest, the image and the theological tag came to me when i was just going to sleep one night. i found it funny, and since this is my web log, i thought i would put it up. no motives of creating reactions of any kind. although no man knows his own motives. only god does. so fishon’s guess is just a guess.
NP said “…no man knows his own motives.”
——Man, where do you come up with that? That is just gobbledygook.
Paul tells the Thessalonians, “For the appeal we make does not spring from error or impure MOTIVES [caps mine], nor are we trying to trick you.”
Sounds as if Paul understands motives quite well.
fishon
Sounds as if Paul understands motives quite well.(fishon)
Do you forget that Paul is just a man?
Yes, I do remember.
But I am not concerned about how you understand it, but I am concerned about NP understands it.
fishon
Wheee, if I were a shrink I would diagnose you with some kind of sexual deprivation syndrome, but I’m not, so I’ll just tell mytself that this is not funny to me at all.. and then lol!
Dave,
Haven’t posted here in a while, but know that I LOVE this post.
Fishon,
Sometimes it seems like you’re here to just try and “check” the NP. If that is the case, talk about the irony of your criticisms.
It just seems like you’re kind of “watch-dog-God-Squad” all the time with him. Why do you care so much about his inner motivations, etc?
And…
Why are you the one to try to push it with the guy?
I think too that if we’re going to start using the Sacred Text for prooftexting our particular understanding of human psychology then what about the claims of Jeremiah that speaks of the unknowability of the human heart? I mean, is tit-for-tat what you really want?
I think if you pause for a moment you’d see that such a game is fruitless…
I think too that if we’re going to start using the Sacred Text for prooftexting our particular understanding of human psychology then what about the claims of Jeremiah that speaks of the unknowability of the human heart? I mean, is tit-for-tat what you really want?
Is that a purposeful play on words, since Jeremiah was talking about how can a person understands his heart(/motive), rather than how can a person know it. Should I assume that you’ve interpreted it wrongly?
And I’m not trying to side with Fishon, but I just can’t help it when I see people saying things that are seemingly hypocritical:
Why do YOU care so much about his intention?
If he’s here to “check” David, what’s so wrong about that?
What’s YOUR intention?