A Parable About Hank

mis-t-highs

I'm filling up
Registered Senior Member
A parable about Hank
(you'll get it)

Don't know if y'all ever saw this before, but it's funny...

John:
"Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."
Mary:
Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me:
"Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"
John:
"If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the **** out of you."
Me:
"What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"
John:
"Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."
Me:
"That doesn't make any sense. Why..."
Mary:
"Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"
Me:
"Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."
John:
"Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me:
"Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"
Mary:
"Oh yes, all the time..."
Me:
"And has He given you a million dollars?"
John:
"Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."
Me:
"So why don't you just leave town now?"
Mary:
"You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the **** out of you."
Me:
"Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"
John:
"My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."
Me:
"Haven't you talked to her since then?"
John:
"Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."
Me:
"So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"
Mary:
"Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."
Me:
"What's that got to do with Hank?"
John:
"Hank has certain 'connections.'"
Me:
"I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."
John:
"But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the **** out of you."
Me:
"Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."
Mary:
"No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."
Me:
"Then how do you kiss His ass?"
John:
"Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."
Me:
"Who's Karl?"
Mary:
"A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."
Me:
"And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"
John:
"Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."




From the desk of Karl

Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
Use alcohol in moderation.
Kick the **** out of people who aren't like you.
Eat right.
Hank dictated this list Himself.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Everything Hank says is right.
Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
Don't use alcohol.
Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the **** out of you.




Me:
"This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."
Mary:
"Hank didn't have any paper."
Me:
"I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."
John:
"Of course, Hank dictated it."
Me:
"I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"
Mary:
"Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."
Me:
"I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the **** out of people just because they're different?"
Mary:
"It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."
Me:
"How do you figure that?"
Mary:
"Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"
Me:
"Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."
John:
"No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."
Me:
"But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."
John:
"There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."
Me:
"Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."
Mary:
"But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."
Me:
"I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."
John:
"Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"
Me:
"We do?"
Mary:
"Of course we do, Item 7 says so."
Me:
"You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"
John:
"Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."
Me:
"But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"
Mary:
She blushes.
John:
"Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."
Me:
"What if I don't have a bun?"
John:
"No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."
Me:
"No relish? No Mustard?"
Mary:
She looks positively stricken.
John:
He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"
Me:
"So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"
Mary:
Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."
John:
"That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."
Me:
"It's good! I eat it all the time."
Mary:
She faints.
John:
He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the **** out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."
With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

it has religious overtones does'nt it.
 
It does have religious overtones but I want to point out a few places where Hank is not parallel to God.

1) God (allah or insert name) does not constrain those from straying if he did their would be no athiest or agnostics. Hank does.

2) As far as I know Christanity is the only expression of gnoism that says salvations comes through acceptance or believe. Other religions contend that it comes from a moral and just lifestyle.

3) Most religions see religion equally outside the home and only use religious gatherings for a sense of their religious community and benefit to their society.
The one exceptions being Christanity. (not sure about islamic religions).

4) The part about Karl and his writings is very true for Christanity and Islamic religion but not true of others.

It may be more accurate to say this story, which is very clever in it presentation, and well written, has Christian overtones in it as opposed to religious overtones.
 
I am wrong about # 1. Hank does not either Karl does. So let me withdrawl that one.
 
The first time i read it a few years back just after realising atheism was right for me, i laughed for hours, i still laugh a lot everytime i read it, i'd go as far as saying its creative genius, and very true, and so far i have not seen one sound arguement against why it differs from christianity, though i have seen people try, i wonder if we'll get a discussion about it this time as im sure its been posted before.
 
This "parable" is by Jim Huber. Jim has other parables on his site. I think Fred Wanted to Ski is the best, possibly because it's a parody of a particular (tragic) event, rather than the broader target of Christianity in general.

Note that Jim has a peculiar worldview himself.


Jim Cooper has a page humorously applying the Hank parable to other religions. You can download a movie of Kissing Hank's Ass from infidelguy.com. (This movie was made by Nimpsy, but their link to the movie is busted).
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Religious World needs to understand that the Ancient Proofs of their Religion may seem to outsiders like mere fabricated assertions formulated to advance Priestly Interests.

But your Parable does not retain its parallels in the case of Living Religions that can demonstrate empirical examples of Divine Revelation and Providence, The Miraculous, and genuine Mystical Experience.

Books are not always false. It reminds me of when I was once thrown in with an Infantry Platoon. I was curious as to where we were and seeing that nobody was paying any attention to the Map, I asked if I could hold it. I had a pocket compass and noted our direction and I counted our steps using my Rosary. Eventually what I suspected became evident -- these grunts were lost. They were all Dropouts and assumed that Books and Other Printed Materials were only a waste of their time. And until they became somewhat desparate they thought I was a waste of their time. But I knew where we were. When I felt I would finally be listened to I spoke up and said, "I know where we are, and how to get to Base Camp. If we go 170 Yards up this rise, we will come out upon a huge field with a clump of trees a half mile away. Past the Trees by another half mile will be a hill with a tower on top. In front of that Hill we will find a road which is 3 miles from Camp. Let's go! In 5 minutes we will know whether I am right". Of course I was.

Real Religion is like a Map.
 
Hi Leo,
I notice you haven't replied to questions about the dancing sun at Lourdes, and the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in the [thread=39161]Anwers to Atheism[/thread] thread.
 
Last edited:
it seems to me that you, LEO, have the mind of 5 year old, but must be 250 years old, as you been everywhere, and dont everything.
next you be telling us, that you were an astronaut, or a pilot, in the underground airforce.
 
How does someone know that what they see with their eyes open is more real than what they see with their eyes closed?

Pete, there was no dancing sun at Lourdes. Evidence shows that the picture of guadalupe was retouched, but not entirely painted. http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Guadalupe.html

I don't think what you've written about fatima is true either.
 
okinrus said:
How does someone know that what they see with their eyes open is more real than what they see with their eyes closed?

I suppose it is down to experience in your perception of the world. We could all say well maybe this is all a dream, but would we be able to say that with the conviction we have if we are in a dream?

Dave
 
I suppose it is down to experience in your perception of the world. We could all say well maybe this is all a dream, but would we be able to say that with the conviction we have if we are in a dream?
Their perception of their world is formed with their eyes opened, and very well gets automatically placed there by evolution. They, that have an innate trust that what they see as reality, are not so different than the faith someone has in God. It's based upon experience and sight. We cannot say that world through our eyes is reality without actually opening our eyes, and we also cannot say that the faith is not reality without actually having faith.
 
okinrus said:
Evidence shows that the picture of guadalupe was retouched, but not entirely painted. http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Guadalupe.html

That web page tells a story, but presents no actual evidence. Where are the checkable references?
The site itself is interesting, but appears uninterested in credibility

okinrus said:
I don't think what you've written about fatima is true either.

You're welcome to think what you like, of course.
 
That web page tells a story, but presents no actual evidence. Where are the checkable references?
The websight mentions an expert who has written a book filled about his analysis of the picture.

You're welcome to think what you like, of course.
I think it's probable that all 70,000 saw it but only a hundred or so were given the opportunity to give solomn testimony to the Vatican. I haven't read all the testimonies, nor do I know where they are recorded.

Fatima may be some sort of a sign due to a similar occurrence(where the sun is described to have turned different colors) at Nuremburg Germany. http://www.subversiveelement.com/NurembergGlobes.html

Nevertheless, 70,000 seeing an event like this does not have too much of an impact on our culture. A similar event happened in <a href="http://www.zeitun-eg.org/">Zeitun</a> where millions of people saw the apparition and photographs were taken. These kind of things either have a way of fading out of people's mind or the publicity to them isn't given.
 
The website mentions an expert who has written a book filled about his analysis of the picture.
It mentions Mr Tonsmann, butgives no clues to how to access his work directly. I would like to see the evidence before accepting one man's interpretation of it.

I think it's probable that all 70,000 saw it
Why do you think that is probable?
 
okinrus said:
Their perception of their world is formed with their eyes opened, and very well gets automatically placed there by evolution. They, that have an innate trust that what they see as reality, are not so different than the faith someone has in God. It's based upon experience and sight. We cannot say that world through our eyes is reality without actually opening our eyes, and we also cannot say that the faith is not reality without actually having faith.

Hello Okinrus,

Well this could get all complex on us :) We agree that it is based upon experience and sight(perception I said). It is all a question of trust really. Our instincts rely heavily on the material world. So we learn to trust our perception of this world as it's because of this that we get food, pro create and make money to go on holidays and such. We don't need faith, or so it seems this way for many people.

Dave
 
Well this could get all complex on us We agree that it is based upon experience and sight(perception I said). It is all a question of trust really. Our instincts rely heavily on the material world. So we learn to trust our perception of this world as it's because of this that we get food, pro create and make money to go on holidays and such. We don't need faith, or so it seems this way for many people.
Dave, I think someone may claim not to need religious faith but this is really a judgement based upon their current conditions, even what they believe faith is. While an atheists says faith is belief in something unproven is faith, their entire reality is unproven to exist anywhere but within themselves.

It mentions Mr Tonsmann, butgives no clues to how to access his work directly. I would like to see the evidence before accepting one man's interpretation of it.
Pete, I have not read his book. To accurately make a judgement on guadalupe, I would need to read a number of experts, including artists and opthalmologists. The formation of random images might be similar to the Bible codes.

http://www.catholicstore.com/browseproducts/Guadalupe---What-Her-Eyes-Say.HTML

Why do you think that is probable?
The photographs of the crowd and the recorded accounts I was able to find. http://www.ewtn.com/fatima/apparitions/October.htm
 
Back
Top