Showing posts with label humor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label humor. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Advances in Christian Broadcasting...
From "Rodney Trotter":
The following memo has turned up, leaked from a well-known coalition/alliance of gospel types:
Re: Christian Broadcasting
In light of the cultural mandate (Gen. 1:28), and in reaction to the harsh, unloving and world-denying fundamentalism of a previous generation, the following suggestions for producing a series of Christian Life and Worldview programs should be considered:
Dancing with the Evangelical Stars. Contestants compete for the right to become worship leaders at a big church. Problem: no reformed women
celebs and, as we don't want to encourage `that sort of thing' (Eph. 5:3) , dancers must go solo. Could unfairly favour the Sovereign Grace guys, but their worship experience will be counterbalanced by their lack of any sense of rhythm.
Evangelical Idol: young pastors compete to be signed to a label that will give them a ministry named after themselves. Re. judges, Derek Thomas obvious choice for Simon Cowell part; Justin Taylor for Paula Abdul. Program title may need some work.
Evangelical America's Got Talent: ugly pastors of small churches perform their chosen `talent' before a celebrity panel. Possibly favours the guys who aren't shaving yet, as the "granny vote" can be decisive when it comes to the final round. Big prize: get a contract with Christian publisher to have a study Bible named after you.
The Reformed Apprentice: ambitious young pastors work for the chance to ride the coattails of a megapastor by performing difficult feats for said pastor such as managing the church stock portfolio, offshore accounts, and overseas investments. Not sure would lead this. Tim Keller obvious choice but Donald-Trump-You're-Fired! catchphrase `Brother, I want to affirm you in your God-given talents and stress that we have an every member ministry in Christ's church and I am sure that the Lord is calling you to be of great use to him in some alternative, but equally valid and biblical capacity' lacks a certain punch. Maybe just go with John MacArthur?
Looks like Christian TV will never be the same.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Reading Humpty Dumpty with N.T. Wright
From Jason Hood
Tom Wright Reads Humpty Dumpty
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall
Clearly the writer is telling an Israel story, and here alludes to the Temple. This echoes other lines in early 2nd Nursery Literature, such as Mother Hubbard’s cupboard (the “storehouse” of the Temple) and the bone (resurrection life) which she sought for her dog (“Gentiles”). “But when she got there, the cupboard was bare and the poor little doggie had none.” The temple had nothing to offer the Gentiles, and they thus remained in their state of Adamic sin and decay.
So here, too, one should not be surprised to discover that the Temple and its “wall” are bankrupt. The next line, then, is not a shock, but an expectation:
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall
Again, this is patently a forecast of the Temple’s destruction (and contra Crossan and Borg, an entirely possible historical forecasting). Doubtless this claim is intended to lead the reader to ponder the eschatological recreation of the Temple. Since Humpty stands for the Temple, he seems to be sharing in the divine identity, functioning as the locus of God’s presence, not outside of, but within creation.
Of course, this fall is an exile of sorts, the loss of God’s presence. The tension is palpable: how will humpty’s story not turn out dumpty? In other words, this line presupposes what I have called elsewhere the great metanarrative of humpty, not least the promise of resurrection.
But all the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put humpty together again.
So the Temple will be built again, but not by human hands. Many have undertaken to suggest that this passage runs counter to a belief in resurrection. But this atomistic reading of the text lacks imagination. Of course, it is the king himself who will put humpty together again, and this great act will complete the metanarrative.
After all, Humpty is the place where the Creator God is resident with his creation. But the human inability to recreate Humpty does not negate all human effort for creation, which should be done in light of the proleptic nature of the king’s restoration of Humpty and all creation.
Written in Durham Cathedral, dedicated to Rowan Williams’s left eyebrow.
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall
Clearly the writer is telling an Israel story, and here alludes to the Temple. This echoes other lines in early 2nd Nursery Literature, such as Mother Hubbard’s cupboard (the “storehouse” of the Temple) and the bone (resurrection life) which she sought for her dog (“Gentiles”). “But when she got there, the cupboard was bare and the poor little doggie had none.” The temple had nothing to offer the Gentiles, and they thus remained in their state of Adamic sin and decay.
So here, too, one should not be surprised to discover that the Temple and its “wall” are bankrupt. The next line, then, is not a shock, but an expectation:
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall
Again, this is patently a forecast of the Temple’s destruction (and contra Crossan and Borg, an entirely possible historical forecasting). Doubtless this claim is intended to lead the reader to ponder the eschatological recreation of the Temple. Since Humpty stands for the Temple, he seems to be sharing in the divine identity, functioning as the locus of God’s presence, not outside of, but within creation.
Of course, this fall is an exile of sorts, the loss of God’s presence. The tension is palpable: how will humpty’s story not turn out dumpty? In other words, this line presupposes what I have called elsewhere the great metanarrative of humpty, not least the promise of resurrection.
But all the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put humpty together again.
So the Temple will be built again, but not by human hands. Many have undertaken to suggest that this passage runs counter to a belief in resurrection. But this atomistic reading of the text lacks imagination. Of course, it is the king himself who will put humpty together again, and this great act will complete the metanarrative.
After all, Humpty is the place where the Creator God is resident with his creation. But the human inability to recreate Humpty does not negate all human effort for creation, which should be done in light of the proleptic nature of the king’s restoration of Humpty and all creation.
Written in Durham Cathedral, dedicated to Rowan Williams’s left eyebrow.
HT: Jason Hood
Monday, June 28, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Friday, August 14, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Good Eats!
I found the following website over at Denise Malagari's blog. I laughed. I cried.
Check it out - THIS IS WHY YOU'RE FAT
Monday, June 22, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
