The Burr in the Burgh

Uh ... if you find me with my head severed from my body, you'll know why. This bit of Koran Karaoke is brilliant. You have to watch this.

UPDATE: If the link above does not work, go here instead.

HT: The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns

Just as the battle is underway in the United States over whether Intelligent Design should be included in the public school curriculum, we read this article from BBC News which states that less than half of the Britons polled believe that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of life. This is remarkable considering the relative secularity of England over against the U.S. Even in a nation where far fewer people attend religious services, a sizeable minority (39%) believe in some theory of origins other than Darwinism and over 40% believe alternate theories (creationism or intelligent design) should be included in public education.

FYI - On Saturday, April 1, Dr. Angus Menuge will give a day-long seminar at Concordia Lutheran Church, 3109 Brownsville Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15227, (412)881-3005 on the question of science and faith, particularly as this relates to the current Intelligent Design controversy .

HT: Jame's M. Kushiner at Touchstone's Mere Comments

I have to admit that my first thought when I read this article is that the guy is a bum. On second thought, that's my second thought too.

E.J. Park has written a fine article for the latest issue of Christianity Today called A Tale of Two Kitties. Now, I love this article for so many reasons. First, because I have two kitty cats and anything with the above title is going to make me say, “Awww.” But seriously, the article touches on two fictional cats that mean a lot to me, for vastly different reasons. The article’s subtitle sums it up: “Lovers of Aslan should heed the warnings of the creator of Hobbes.”

Bill Watterson is the creator of the much-loved comic strip (retired in 1996) Calvin and Hobbes. As fans know, Hobbes is a stuffed tiger toy for the impish Calvin and who comes alive – in Calvin’s imagination? – when they are alone. Hobbes is Calvin’s conscience, the better angel of his nature.

Even though there are countless millions to be made, Watterson has not permitted his comic strip to be used for merchandise. You won't see Calvin wishing you a happy birthday on the front of a Hallmark card. You won't find comic strip panels on coffee mugs or T-shirts. According to Watterson, it would ruin the characters he has created to pull them from the comics and put them into another medium. Giving voices to an animated Calvin & Hobbes Halloween special, for instance, would change them in some fundamental way. Or so Watterson believes.

I have been a huge fan of C.S. Lewis's Narnia books since my youth. I was delighted when I learned that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was being made into a film. And over all, I was happy with it. But now, I'm thinking hard about what Bill Watterson has to say about his characters and the CT article by E.J. Park.

Transforming Aslan from the medium of text to film was always a risky idea. Aslan is a Christ-figure and generations of readers have deeply felt attachments to him as an image of the Savior. Since in my opinion, the film does a fair job, I have given it a pass. But now, seeing Hasbro Aslan action figures and Aslan t-shirts, and Aslan plushy dolls, that changes things. There is something troubling, maybe even sacreligious, about playing with an Aslan toy amidst the Barbie dolls and army men. Or is there? It's just a lion. No, it's an imaginative portrait of Jesus that is being marketed, commercialized and profited from. As Parks says, "Of course, this article is not really about Aslan at all. It is about the Lion behind the lion. For it is one thing to commercialize fictitious kitties; it is quite another to commercialize the way of God."

Is the medium the message? To some extent, I think so. Parks writes: "The fact is, the spirit of a work always differs between forms, because every form has its own characteristics and limitations. ... The story and character might be similar in two works, but they are distinctly shaped by each work's form. Reading a book is never the same experience as watching a movie, which is never the same experience as playing a video game, which is never the same experience as wearing a T-shirt."

NBC has decided to cancel the controversial new show The Book of Daniel. Check out this article. And all I can think of to say is, "Duh!?" I predicted this would happen from the very start.

See my previous post about the show right here.

This comes to me from the lovely Cubicle Reverend.

Four jobs I have had (in chronological order)

• busboy
• the guy who deep fries taco shells for Taco Bell
• Ice cream man
• optician at Lens Crafters
  

• Kansas City, MO
• Ann Arbor, MI
• Fort Wayne, IN
• Los Angeles, CA
  

• Sushi Rolls
• Rogan Josh
• Chili (very spicy with lots of onions)
  
• Fried Oreos
  

• The Lord of the Rings
• Memento
• Saving Private Ryan
• Band of Brothers
  

• Someplace Sunny
• Just about any Caribou Coffee shop
• On a cruise
• Visting the Holy Land

• www.thunderstruck.org
• www.lookingcloser.blogspot.com
• www.merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments
• www.higherthings.org
  

• Julie at Jottings and Such
• Jason Evans at Theology Geek
• Jane at Indiana Jane's Journal
• Frank at Putting Out the Fire
  

Mutti over at Beckfest offers this quote:
The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children. --D. Bonhoeffer


And her excellent application:
I say the test of a morality of a society is what it does to its unborn children.

One of my flaws is that I can never seem to read one book at a time.

I usually have at least one item of fiction going.

A book on homiletics that came highly recommended by a friend.

A book by one of my favorite writers about one of my favorite writers.


What I'll read next:



What's on your reading list?

Pr. Petersen gives a very edifying reflection here. People sometimes ask how things are going at church. They want more than the customary "fine." How to answer?

I like movies. And I like history. But I seldom like it when someone joins the two together. Films about historical figures or based on historical events generally disappoint or upset me. That's because most film-makers seem to be less interested in telling the story than in promoting their social agendas. A great example of this is Ridley Scott's latest piece of celluloid excrement, The Kingdom of Heaven. Badly filmed, badly acted, badly edited and, most of all, badly written. The Christians are either insane, idiotic, savage or anachronisitic models of 21st century liberal Protestants. Orlando Bloom is supremely over-rated and needs to stick to playing taciturn fairies. And those are reasons I called The Kingdom of Heaven the worst movie on earth.

But enough about that. There are two new films that deal with historical subjects which are receiving a good deal of attention right now: Munich and The New World. I haven't seen either one of them yet, so I won't offer any personal opinions about them in this post.

I will, however, link you to a few reviewers that I respect.

First, here is Michael Medved on Munich. I'm not very familiar with all the information surrounding the events recounted in the film, but if we assume (for the sake of argument) Mr. Medved is correct with his facts, then Spielberg has done a disservice to Israel, America, and the war on terror. Admittedly, I am a-priori inclined to agree with Medved because I have personally found him to be a level-headed film critic and one whose opinions about movies frequently parallel my own. He particularly earned my respect when, as an observant Orthodox Jew, he vociferously defended Mel Gibson's movie. The fact that the government of Israel is attacking Spielberg's movie Munich also causes me to suspect Medved's evaluation has merit. Religiously, I am no Zionist. I don't think the piece of real estate lying between Egypt and Syria has any more significance today in God's plan than does Lichtenstein. But I wholeheartedly endorse the state of Israel's right to defend itself. And to equate a government's attack on its enemies to terrorist acts is morally irresponsible.

The second film of interest is called The New World and it's about John Smith's landing in America and his relationship with the native girl, Pocahontas. Several Christian critics are speaking favorably of the film such as Steve Beard, Peter T. Chattaway and Jeffrey Overstreet. This film version, I am pleased to report, represents Pocahontas's conversion to Christianity and does so, apparently, without rancor. If so, then this is much better history than the putrid mess put out by Disney a few years ago which turned this Christian native American girl into a tree-hugging, New Age, Greenpeace, Gaia worshipper.

I just arrived home this evening from a week of theological stimulation at my alma mater. Each January, Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, IN holds a series of lectures relating to topics of biblical and systematic theology. I always enjoy attending this event, certainly because of the lectures, but also for the social interaction. Many alumni treat this week as a grand reunion. I get to see friends and classmates from all over the world whom I seldom see otherwise. And the chapel services are nothing less than phenomenal. Hearing 500 Lutheran pastors singing hymns in that building is riveting. But I know that I also benefit from the laughs and conversations, sharing a beer or three, with my colleagues in the pastoral ministry. And yet. . . it feels so good to be home.

I found this quote over on Rightwing News. He got it from Hog On Ice.

"Imagine the kerfuffle (if Jesus came back today). He comes back, and He goes on TV and says, "Okay, homosexuality is wrong. Sex outside of marriage is wrong. Stop watching porn. Quit smoking dope. And by the way, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and all the other non-Christian religions are wrong, so stop practicing them." Every fat lesbian activist in San Francisco would be out in the street, running around topless and waving a sign reading, "Kill Jesus NOW!" Jesse Jackson would condemn Him. Cindy Sheehan would demand a meeting. Liberals would start calling him JesusHitler."

First, let me be clear. I firmly believe in equal pay for equal work. I am not opposed to all of the ideals of the women's movement. Of course, no one, woman or man, has the right to kill unborn children. But that's not the subject I want to address right now.

One of the stereotypical feminist canards is that men are violent and women are nurturing. The joke is usually that if women ruled the world, there'd be no wars. I don't deny that men are violent, but if you don't think women can be every bit as mean and nasty... well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. And don't try to read between my lines. I am blessed to be married to the most perfect wonderful woman on the planet who would never intentionally hurt a flea (actually fleas do need to be afraid of my wife). I'm just trying to point out that radical feminism is hypocritical.

The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men. And the idea of a fun time for a batch of 10 year old boys usually includes heavy doses of punching, tackling, tripping, tumbling and even biting. Clearly testosterone is a mighty powerful chemical.

I will agree that all men are selfish jerks. But so are all women, frankly. Spite, wrath, vindictiveness, pettiness, egocentrism and vanity are gender neutral vices. Women are not as likely to express their aggressions by taking a swipe at your face, but the demonization of masculinity and the attempted emasculation of church and society are not going to improve the world.

The knife block you see pictured above is an actual product. It's called the "All Men Are Bastards Knife Block."

HT: Right Wing News

Last night, here at Concordia Theological Seminary in Ft. Wayne, IN, we held our first Confessional Lutheran Bloggers Conference. It was fun. Got to meet some great people whose blogs I read every day.

Our speakers were:

Pr. Walt Snyder of Ask the Pastor
Dr. Gene Veith of Cranach
Rev. Eric Stefanski of CAT41 (not a blog)
Jason Evans of Theology Geek

In addition to the speakers and myself, the other Lutheran Bloggers that were present are listed below. Forgive me if I forget someone. I didn't have a chance to greet everyone and we didn't take attendance. Tell me if you were omitted. There were also a number of non-bloggers present who are interested in blogging.

Beggar's All

Bloghardt's Reflector

Confessions of a Young Lutheran

Drowning Myself Whenever I Can

Indiana Jane

The Joshua Victor Theory

Madre's Missives

Preachrblog

Putting Out the Fire

Rev. Cwirla's Blogosphere


This was a good start. And the presentations were very good. Perhaps this is something that we can do again next year and, with more publicity, get even more Lutheran bloggers to meet face to face (in "hard-copy" as Dr. Veith put it) and share ideas.

Thanks to Jason, to Rev. Zimmerman at the sem and Mr. John Klinger, the tech wizard and thanks to everyone else too.

Have you heard about NBC's newest dramedy airing on Friday nights? It's got an impressive cast.

It's called The Book of Ishmael and it's about this suburban pill-popping Muslim imam named Ishmael who gets regular visitations from the prophet Mohammed. And the twist is that Mohammed is this cool, laid-back California prophet who specializes in snappy one-liners.

The show has raised a bit of a ruckus because Ishmael is a drug addict, his wife is an alcoholic, his daughter shows her ankles to the boys at school and his adopted Chinese son is really a transgendered gigolo with low self-esteem.

The fact that every devout Muslim in the world considers the show blasphemous is not a concern of the Network. Insiders say that before long, N B C will stand for No one Buys Commercials.

Antonio Soprano as Ernest Hemingway? Yeah, maybe. See here. Make sure you read the last couple of paragraphs.

It's late and I've had a long and tiring day. My brain is too spent to work properly right now. But I just know that tomorrow morning I am going to be able to think of all kinds of reasons why this is bad.

Go here for the story.

HT: Southern Conservative

Darrell, over at Film Geeks 2.0, has posted a new review of The Exorcism of Emily Rose. And since I just watched the DVD two nights ago myself, I thought I would post a few words. I commented on this film earlier when it was first in the theaters, as did Darrell.

I think it was a good movie. Probably one of my five favorites of the year. First because it was just so well made. The cast was top of the line. Jennifer Carpenter, as Emily Rose, deserves some attention. She was superlative. Laura Linney, who has never given a bad performance, said more with her facial expressions at times than most actors do with a thousand lines of text. Her intelligence was commanding. And if Tom Wilkenson is not nominated for an Academy Award, an injustice will have occured. Usually Christian clergy are portrayed in films as either ignorant, bigotted, or villainous - or all three. Wilkenson's Father Moore was intelligent, sensitive, pastoral, strong, passionate about his beliefs, and willing to sacrifice himself for what is good.

As a pastor, I think this film and others like it can serve a useful purpose. Movies about the devil or demon possession are often overly sensationalistic, gory or special effects laden. This one had it's scary moments, but it was comparatively easy handed in the effects department, which I appreciated. This put more of the attention on the characters. And these characters are exceptionally well-drawn.

What I didn't like:

• While in jail, when Father Moore was being attacked by demonic powers, he prayed to St. Michael for protection. Now the good thing is that it showed that prayer protected him from the devil. But why would he pray to an angel? There is no biblical promise that angels can hear and answer prayer. But there are countless promises that God hears us and answers us when we call out to Him. Pray to God to send an angel, if you like, but don't bother praying to the soldiers when you have ready access to the commander in chief.


• The anthropologist who testified for the defense only muddied the picture as far as I am concerned.


• I found the ending unsatisfactory. I won't spoil it, but I thought it was kind of strange.