PART 3: “Jesus Persecuting Nanny Goats”

This one is fairly simple. It comes from Matthew 25.33: “He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.” He is Christ, the sheep are the righteous (as usual), and the goats are the damned in this parable. Those biblical characters were real sheep lovers. I will testify that I prefer the company of goats over sheep. The goat is a resourceful, intelligent beast with a companionable personality. Sheep are stupid, interchangeable, and they smell terrible. Contrary to popular belief, a goat smells quite pleasant. At some point, some other champion of the goat must have felt that Jesus’ parable was slightly unfair. Therefore (and undeniably), “Jesus Persecuting Nanny Goats” means, “I do not care for, or agree with, this situation that is happening here.” In other words, “Hey, Jesus! Leave them kids alone!”

Next topic: “A Coon’s Age”: Racist or Zoological Origins?

PART 2: “Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ!”

There is no scriptural evidence to explain this expression. Not in the gospels, at least. The mysterious middle initial makes no sense. If the convention of a middle name existed in Christ’s time, his middle name would have been the patronymic “Son of Joseph” (Ben Josef, I believe). As far as the Lord’s hairline goes, any Christian knows that Christ had a wonderful head of golden brown (or possibly blond) hair.

It seems fairly clear that this expression (as did all of these expressions) arose from a culture that was less accepting of blasphemy. Taking the Lord’s name in vain was often more offensive than a scatological profanity. It was certainly deemed a sin. Perhaps by inserting “H. Baldheaded” the speaker hoped to a) separate the Jesus from the Christ and thus lessen the power of the blasphemy or b) literally separate the Jesus from the Christ by suggesting that the person being referenced was not the divine Christ but an impostor of some sort. In essence implying, “I’m not talking about that Jesus Christ.” (See also “Jesus Murphy”).

If we agree that b) is the more likely explanation, as it seems a safer tactic in avoiding, if not the actuality of sin, at least the appearance of sin, we can look to three possible sources for the “H. Baldheaded” construction. The first explanation lies in low-level antisemitism. The second is related to the first and lies in Leviticus. The third can be found in the rise of Rastafarianism in the early part of the last century and also has connections to Leviticus.

The H in “Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ” could stand for Hiram or Herschel or some other supposedly Jewish name. The “Baldheaded” could have arisen from a popular belief (or joke) among Christians that Jews kept their heads covered to hide their baldness. The user of this expression implies that he or she is talking about some Jew who happens to have the same first and last name as the Lord (not knowing, of course, that Christ is not a proper surname but a title).

Similarly, the expression could either identify this other Jesus as explicitly non-Jewish, or it could be an emphatic assertion of Christ’s rejection of Judaism. Leviticus 21.5 instructs, “Priests must not shave their heads”. Christians have generally not followed this particular biblical law (although they often quote Leviticus when it suits their needs). Not only is this Jesus Christ not the Christ he is also not even Jewish (there may also be some allusion here to circumcision). Conversely, the expression may emphasize Christ’s rejection of the laws followed by the Jewish priests who handed him over for execution (a popular Christian conceit, not my own). This seems an unlikely explanation as it would not avoid blasphemy and the phrase is hardly ever used in such a devout context.

This expression may also have arisen as a response to the Rastafari belief that the Emperor of Ethiopia is Jah Rastafari, God incarnate, or Christ returned. Again suggesting that the Christ being mentioned is not Jesus Christ but this other “false” Christ. The H would stand for Haile Selassie I (the emperor’s name) and the Baldheaded would refer to the Emperor’s receding hairline. It is equally likely that this expression arose from the Rastafari movement itself and was later co-opted by white Christian society. The dreadlocks worn by Rasta are not an affectation but a form of devotion taken directly from Leviticus 21.5. Non-believers are referred to as “baldheads”. Thus, Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ would be a reference to the perverted, white, Christian conception of Jesus, as opposed to the true Jah. It seems reasonable to believe that the culture that gave us reggae would insert the H as a flourish that would improve the rhythmic qualities of the expression. At any rate, this is an area that requires further research as it would have to be established that this expression was not in popular use prior to the 1930’s when the Rastafari movement began.

Next week: “Jesus Persecuting Nanny Goats!”

**** It has been pointed out to me that Christ’s title IHS might explain the H initial. ****

Christ’s Pogo Stick: Scriptural Origins of My Grandfather’s Exclamations

PART 1

“Jumpin’ Jesus on a Pogo Stick”

This exclamation is a more extreme form of the familiar “Jumpin’ Jesus”, “Jumpin’ Jehoshaphat”, or “Jumped Up Jesus”.  I have studied the canonical gospels and I can find no reference to Christ using a pogo stick or anything like a pogo stick. The only modes of transportation mentioned in the gospels, in relation to Jesus, are a boat and a donkey. It is safe to assume that he also rode a camel at some point in his life but there are no direct references to this in the scriptures. Does this mean that there were no camels and that Christ did not ride them? Certainly not. Similarly, the lack of scriptural evidence does not exclude the possibility that the Lord rode a pogo stick or something very similar.

While official history tells us that George Hansburg, an Illinois toy manufacturer, was the first to develop and patent the pogo stick in 1919, Egyptologists have discovered evidence that the ancient Egyptians may have used pogo-type sticks. In the cartouche shown below, there does appear to be a man falling off something that looks much like a pogo stick.

 

The cartouche dates from the third dynasty during which slapstick comedy rose to a divine art form (We can all agree that nothing could be funnier than a man unsuccessfully riding a pogo stick). It is also safe to assume that the Israelites in bondage in Egypt would have been exposed to this technology and would have brought it back to the Holy Land with them. Testing this theory, and based on the Egyptian evidence, students at Shenkar College of Engineering in Israel have built a primitive pogo stick using only materials that would have been available in biblical times. The pogo stick’s absence from Exodus, or any of the Mosaic texts, is certainly not surprising given the unsuitable desert conditions that would have made the pogo stick impractical. A thorough examination of the apocrypha and gnostic gospels may provide some evidence that Christ did, in fact, jump on a pogo stick.

The more familiar expression, “Jumpin’ Jesus”, or “Jumped Up Jesus”, seems to stem from two sources. The first, and most obvious, source is the assertion in all Christian theology that Christ rose form the dead. He literally jumped up and lived after being executed. However, this explanation seems more closely related to “Jumped Up Jesus” than”Jumpin’ Jesus” or “Jumpin’ Jehoshaphat”.  Why was the Son of God involved in so much jumping? This would seem to stem from a misinterpretation of the assertion that Christ was exorcising in the temple.  Christ was, of course, engaged in casting out demons and not calisthenics. But, the unlettered would not be able to distinguish these similar sounding words and would assume that Christ was exercising in the temple, hence “Jumpin’ Jesus”.

 

Look for Part 2 later this week: “Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ”

Essaying to Improve

When I first journeyed into the blogosphere (is that what they call it?), I wrote an epistolary essay addressing the Canadian government and Canadians in general. I believe my next offering was an essay on autoeroticism (this was in response to a challenge from a small perverted friend of mine).  Since then my blog has devolved into a series of profanity laden rants, Seinfeldian (a word I hope I just coined) “what’s the deal with <blank>?”, and “dear diary” entries. Basically I make a lot of noise without much substance (with the exception, of course, of my warning labels, which I am quite proud of. However, these are a visual presentation and not representative of my writing). I’d like to raise the quality and quantity from here on in. So, I will begin writing a series of proper essays.

I will welcome topics, assignments, challenges, critiques, arguments, and gifts of money and/or food and/or liquor.

The first series: Christ’s Pogo Stick: Scriptural Origins of My Grandfather’s Exclamations 

Part 1: “Jumpin’ Jesus on a Pogo Stick!”

Radio Free Kirt

It’s funny how radio (commercial radio, that is) sounds so much like a parody of itself, or maybe a parody of radio is so accurate that it ceases to be a parody. The line is very blurry. I don’t know how people can listen to that shit for more than five minutes without wanting to put their ears to an electric sander.

Stranger In A Strange Land: Takin’ the Piss Out of a “Classic”

I grokked a great wrongness in this “classic” of sci-fi, supposedly Heinlein’s “masterpiece” (incidentally, the verb “to grok” has started to grate on my nerves so I will refrain from ever using it again).

The fullness of its wrongness (in point form):

• Far too long. When it was first published his editors made him cut it down from 200,000 words. I wish they had pushed it further and cut another 200 pages. The most compelling and interesting plot line comes to a resolution about halfway through the novel. Much of the second half of the novel is taken up with long speeches by one or two characters, possibly interesting but not very well integrated into the story.
• Self-indulgent. Heinlein uses Jubal Harshaw as his mouthpiece for waxing philosophical on a variety of topics. Get over yourself, Robert. Write essays if you want to tackle these topics at such length. Don’t pull them from the mouths of your characters. (Heinlein’s dead so this advice falls on deaf ears).
• Sadly dated. Where did they get these kooky notions about what would happen in the next 40 years? Life on Mars? Weren’t they fairly sure, even in the 60’s, that there was none? And the technology is so adorably quaint (as most of these 60’s sci-fi novels are). Flying cars, but people still use film in cameras and personal computers aren’t even mentioned. It just strikes you as so hokey and short sighted. That’s just the technology. The man is credited with writing a guide book for the hippie, counter culture, sexual revolution. He studies, in depth, the idea of open marriages, “free love”, orgies, but somehow manages to be homophobic. Maybe Heinlein had some experiences in the navy that made him “protest too much.” And the women: nurses, secretaries, mothers, cooks, strippers, etc. That’s fine. It is possible that the Women’s Lib movement could have completely stalled in the 60’s. But I doubt that Heinlein even thought of that. The female characters are void of true personality or individuality. At the end of the novel, The Man from Mars has even taught them all how to look the same! It’s just laughably sexist and hard to take seriously.
• Predictable and unsatisfying ending. Mike “The Man From Mars” martyrs himself, Jesus-style. Yawn.
• An Arab nicknamed Stinky. He’s totally cool with it too. The Jews (who are extraordinarily good with money) are okay with “Hebe”, too.
• The dialogue. Nobody talks like a real person. And they all talk exactly the same way in this sometimes slangy, hipster-speak, sometimes uber-intellectual banter. It’s quite annoying. Throw in the liberal use of “grok” throughout and you have a good formula for Kirt throwing a book across the room.

The book was good enough for me to keep reading it to the end (although there were times (usually in the middle of one of Jubal’s long speeches) that I almost put it down for good). But I don’t know if it deserves the status it enjoys in the sci-fi canon. I’ll take Clarke or Asimov any day over this chuckle-head.

These Are Actual Books?!

Facebook for Dummies: If you need this book, I don’t want you on my “friends” list. “Somebody has written on my wall? What wall? What does that mean? Oh God, now somebody’s poking me. They’re poking me! What do I do? I wish I had a book or somethin’.”

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Reading With Your Kids: The most profoundly appropriate title I have seen in this series. If you need this book, I’d rather you had not procreated.

Books like these used to be guides to complex things. Now they have lost all the irony in the titles. They are for dummies and complete idiots.

Kirt Vocals Quits Smoking (But Still Thinks the Anti-Smoking Fanatics Should Fuck Off)

After a long and loving relationship, smoking and I are parting ways. My reasons are threefold:

1. Losing my grandfather to CPOD has made me mindful of the possibility of an extremely unpleasant death about 15-20 years too soon (people on both sides of my family live well into their 90s). I would also like to spare my family the pain of witnessing that kind of death.

2. The Canadian government has made the habit ridiculously expensive and the same government has set wolves upon me for my frivolous decision to get an education.

3. The Anti-Smoking Cocksuckers have made it impossible for me to enjoy a cigarette in a warm, comfortable environment.

The first reason is the most compelling. But I must stress that it is only the risk of that death, not a certainty. AND I would never suggest that people be compelled , by law, to follow my example. With the second and third reasons the Butt-Out Butinskis have won a small victory but not a moral victory. Treating adults like children is not the sort of government I crave. This is just a personal decision that has nothing to do with their self-righteousness.

So, here is the plan for anyone else who wants to quit with me:

Kirt Vocals’ 7 Week Quit Smoking Plan

Smoking Schedule

Week 1 – 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM

11 Smokes A Day

Week 2 – 7 AM 9AM 11 AM 1 PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM

9 Smokes A Day

Week 3 – 7 AM 9 AM 1 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM

7 Smokes A Day

Week 4 – 7 AM 1 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM

5 Smokes A Day

Week 5 – 7 AM 1 PM 11 PM

3 Smokes A Day

Week 6 – 7 AM 11 PM

2 Smokes A Day

Week 7 – Stay Strong. If you make it through this week you’re out of the woods.

0 Smokes A Day For the Rest of Your Life.

We’ll see how well this works. Wish me luck, and good luck to you.

Killing in the Name

I’d really like it if all of these assholes who are so anxious to die for God would hurry up and do it (preferably without taking innocents with them) and leave the rest of us the hell alone. I don’t often believe in God but when I do, I imagine a much different outcome for these lunatics:

Fanatic: So, killing myself and innocent bystanders in your name is wrong?

The Almighty: Exactly.

Fanatic: It’s a bad thing?

The Almighty: Pretty much.

Fanatic: So, no fluffy clouds and angels?

The Almighty: Nope.

Fanatic: No virgins?

The Almighty: There were never any virgins, dipshit. I don’t even know where you got that.

Fanatic: Can I have a do over?

The Almighty: That’s a different department, and they have some pretty strict rules themselves.

Fanatic: Oh. . . So, bottom floor, right?

The Almighty: There will be someone to show you around. Dress lightly.

Keep ‘Em Wantin’ More

My favourite search terms that found my blog: “Kirt nude”. I’m very flattered, whoever you are.