Archive for the ‘Humour’ Category

Carl Trueman Was on David Letterman?

Say what? Yes, that’s right. You heard correctly. The inestimable Dr. Carl Trueman of Westminster Seminary recently sang his heart out on David Letterman. Reviews have called his performance both “manly” and “refreshing.” But, you be the judge. Behold …..

By the way, he really gets going at 3:00.

Civilized Discourse Online

SMBC has the goods (complete with PG13 language, if, you know, that bothers you):


Ancient Greeks Best Modern Germans

In fairness to Andrew’s growing appreciation of classical philosophy, I thought I should not shy away from the one instance where classical Greek philosophers were shown to clearly to be superior to their modern German counterparts:

Barack Obama Sings Sexy Back

Just because ….

HT: David Frum

Before Economics


Who’s Afraid Of Rachel Held Evans?

There’s a clip of the ever-brilliant Monty Python’s Flying Circus where, at the bottom of the screen, there is a flashing sign that reads “Satire” during one of their skits. Anyone who knows Monty Python knows that this “warning” was of course redundant. Perhaps though the publishers of Rachel Held Evans’ last book might have considered provided such a disclaimer on her dust jacket – because a lot of folks seem to be taking what appears to be a satire (and not necessarily an original one) entirely at face value.

Kathy Keller appears to reprimand Evans very sincerely for not understanding such import precepts to biblical interpretation as context, culture, and authorial intent. While Doug Wilson does a very serious critique based around something that Evans said on a TV show. Now I have not read a whole lot of Kathy Keller, so I just don’t know what sort of “voice” she writes with, but Wilson’s approach of taking this all Very Seriously is a bit odd, since he appears to enjoy deploying humour as a rhetorical approach. With no small irony I can note that Wilson is fond of this joke:

Q: How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: That’s not funny.

I imagine that Wilson’s accusations that Evans is something of a fool would sting if it weren’t so transparently obvious that she was playing one for the purpose of the book she wrote.

Wilson takes the approach of claiming that Evans wrote what amounts to a Talmudic commentary to be added on to scripture – and not a very good. I suppose that that’s what happened if one takes Evans entirely literally. The dots that Wilson cannot seem to connect (but that Keller acknowledges) is that Evans is parodying any number of proponents of complementarian gender roles. Evans may make silly commands for herself about sitting on the roof, but then there’s Mark Driscoll making completely sincere commands about the importance of the wife providing oral sex for the husband, or stripteases. Driscoll’s Talmud, if perhaps somewhat uncomfortable to Wilson, still gets something of a pass from him.

I haven’t read Evans book, I have no idea if it’s good or not, I probably won’t bother with it myself, but let’s at least be honest about just how seriously she took this project.

Class War Is Mutual Destruction

I’ve been slowly ploughing through Emil Brunner’s Justice and the Social Order. Soon, I hope to have some more extensive thoughts on it to share. It has been an encouraging experience. For the moment, though, I’d like to offer one passage I just read that, I think, demonstrates Brunner’s insight into the connection between the created order and our everyday realities.

The capitalist or employer who regards his workers merely as “factors in production,” as “hands” whom he can dismiss whenever he finds it more profitable, who feels no common bond with them but his immediate interest in profit, repudiates the bond of common service with them. He regards his workers in the same way as a bad general regards his men as cannon fodder. The Marxist worker, on the other hand, for whom even the employer whose attitude is totally different, and who has a full sense of responsibility, is only the exploiter, denies the community of labour and rends asunder what belongs together by order of creation. The primary wrong has to be laid to the charge of that kind of capitalist, but the secondary wrong, arising as its result and hence more pardonable, is not less disastrous. On both sides the class war is the mutual destruction of the community of labour. And yet economic life is precisely the field in which the mutual bond, the mutual dependence of the responsible chief with the authority vested in him by the matter in hand, and the worker submitting in confidence of his own free will, exhibits most clearly the difference of kind and function and the equality of personal dignity established in creation. (192)

Jim Caviezel Sings As Christopher Walken

I’m finishing up a paper on Molinism for a philosophy course and a sermon tonight, so apologies for this post not being really substantive. Regardless, here’s some Friday frivolity: Jim Caviezel singing a Chicago song as Christopher Walken. (HT: Denny Burk).

 

Hank Hill On Contemporary Worship

Not a fan:

Happy Birthday Dan!

Happy Birthday You Old Stinker

Happy Birthday You Old Stinker