12 Comments

  1. I think that is supposed to be the joke. The detective didn’t pay attention to the details of life and did not notice the Devil leading him astray. He will now be banished to suffer unbearable torment for all eternity. Because He’s a loving God.

    Seems rather petty. Feels that the detective was set up. And the joke is laboured. It really requires me to stretch to get what I think the intent is.

  2. I saw it the exact opposite. He’s a detective and was supposed to be looking for the devil but wasn’t successful.

  3. Or maybe he was the joke is he was a detective and failed to find the devil. He failed so badly he’s doomed to spend eternity in heaven and never come close to finding the devil.

    Two things we’re sure of: 1) the joke is “devil’s in the details”; 2) no matter how badly one can conceive butchering it, this butchered it 20 fold

  4. I’m sure it has come up on CIDU before, and I posted some references putting the god version ahead of the devil version, which fit with the order I had encountered them. The other interesting thing was the original attribution, which I had wrong. I thought it was originally from Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, but apparently research contradicts that. I’ll have to go have another look at maybe QI. (Not the panel show, though actually that would be nice too.)

  5. I think the rather sympathetic facial expressions on the angels’ faces lend credence to Urban Variable’s “God” interpretation.
    P.S. @ Mitch4 – I can’t remember this comic, nor any discussion about it. I won’t say it never got posted, but it’s not tagged on any CIDU post as far back as the beginning of last year. It’s dated 2019, although we all know that it may have been redated as a rerun. If it was much older than that, than the thread would have been torched by Comicgeddon.

  6. Kilby — Sorry, I didn’t put that clearly. It’s not this particular comic that I think was repeated, just that there was something which turned on the “God is in the details” quotation, and I posted some remarks and sources.

  7. ” I’ll have to go have another look at maybe QI. ”

    Careful, Mitch4. That’s the kind of black hole that could swallow your whole day.

  8. Agree with the “petty” comment. That’s what’s always bothered me about Pascal’s Wager: if logic says God doesn’t exist, it seems petty to punish us for not believing!

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s