Huzzah! Lent is coming! Lent is coming!
Everyone loves Lent, but the modern Lent-lover would be forgiven for being undecided when it comes to what they should give up for 40 days and nights. Have no fear, Imaginary Review-fans! I will show you the way! For I am the Imaginary Reviewer: Usher at the wedding of Fact and Fancy!
Crying is a great thing to give up for Lent! A good weep uses up around sixteen quartacres of water; multiply this by a daily sobbing and you’ve got enough liquid to put into a bucket and use to demonstrate inertia. Why not give up crying for Lent, save all the water your tears would have taken up and send it to Africa?
You may be tempted to give up Hats for Lent. This is madness. Hats keep us warm during these wintry times and for God’s sake it’s windy out! Put a hat on before you catch your death of cold, you nutter!
It’s a little-known fact of Christianity that God doesn’t look too favourably on Murder. So why not give it up for Lent? Instead of shooting, stabbing or defenestrating people between Ash Wednesday and Easter, why not simply maim them instead, and leave the killing to God? He knows what He’s doing.
40 Days and 40 Nights is a terrible film about someone giving up sex for Lent. Why would anyone do that? It’s silly! Don’t give up sex for Lent, give up this film! Avoid 40 Days and 40 Nights until after Easter (or for the rest of your life).
Lots of people like to give up Religion during Lent. Abandoning their faith at this time means that they don’t have to give anything up, which means that they can do whatever they want to, including being religious! Doing this actually creates a paradox which may end up sucking all of existence into a black hole, so it’s best not to do it.
During Lent I like to give up my acceptance of Peano’s Second Axiom of Mathematics, the one that says “For all natural numbers x and y, if x = y, then y = x.” For 40 days and nights I refuse to believe this self evident tautological statement. Yes, once Ash Wednesday begins, I will remain convinced that even if ‘2’ is the same as ‘2’, the second ‘2’ is actually different from the first. You won’t believe the number of fights I’ve had with mathematicians over the years during Lent.
Many people try to give up Booze during Lent, but this is too difficult, even for the most hardened Lent-lover. After six days the whisky starts talking to you, then if you’re still dry after three weeks you start sleep walking to the liquor store. At least I do, anyway. Start simply, and just give up a specific drink, like Bean Brothers 2005 Oak Cellared Chardonnay.
I hope I’ve managed to guide you through your many options when it comes to quitting things for Lent. If you have any other ideas of things people might want to give up, why not mention them in the comments? I’m sure someone will care.
The Imaginary Reviewer will not be held responsible if nobody cares.
Showing posts with label christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label christianity. Show all posts
Friday, 20 February 2009
Sunday, 8 February 2009
Last Night’s TV: Jesus Job-Swap
Jesus Job-Swap, the latest reality TV show from the makers of Wife Swap, Trading Places and Let’s Make a Koala the Mayor of Innsbruck for a Week and See What Happens, debuted last night on DBC. It takes a well-worn premise – two people switch jobs for a while - and stitches a little new life into it: one of the people swapping jobs is Jesus Christ, son of God and major player on the religious scene.
Saturday’s episode had Jesus swapping roles with Delores, owner of a small catering firm in California. As with most shows of this ilk, both participants were built up for a fall from the beginning, with the producers showing each of them oozing bravado and confidence at the task ahead. Jesus, for example, is unfazed by the prospect of having to cater a wedding reception for five hundred people the following week. “Five hundred people?” he asks, unimpressed. “I’ve had to feed ten times that before. No worries,” he laughs.
Delores was equally ebullient from the onset, quoting her “excellent man-management skills” as reasons why she’s more than qualified for the role of Son of God. She does warn, however, that while God may be the all-knowing, all-seeing creator of the universe, “He’s going to have to learn that I don’t take crap from anyone.”
But, as is always the case with these shows, neither Jesus nor Delores has an easy ride. In the course of the hour-long programme, the American woman learns that being figurehead for a belief system is no mean feat. Conversely, Jesus gets to know that the catering business isn’t a breeze, even for a man worshipped by millions of devotees.
It’s during these scenes that the best moments in Jesus Job-Swap arise. When the irate newlyweds confront the Son of God over his deviation from the agreed menu at their reception, it’s car-crash television; I couldn’t look away. As the bride violently asked why the steak tartare and scalloped potatoes had been replaced by a simple bread-and-fish meal, I thought for all the world that she was going to punch the earthly incarnation of the Creator. Luckily, fate intervened and an earthquake interrupted the fight.
Delores didn’t have it any easier, either. All the way through the episode she has to repeatedly tell her new boss that “you can treat your own son like that, Mister, but you can’t treat me like that!” She also becomes extremely fatigued at the task of making her face miraculously appear in food products, and in doing so, realises that being the Son of God isn’t all lambs and magic wine tricks. “There’s some self-sacrifice in this job, you know,” she tells the camera, wearily.
And ultimately, as with most shows of this genre, both participants learn many things about their switchee and about themselves, which in turn gives the viewer a sense of accomplishment and closure. Both Jesus and Delores realise things that we, the external viewers, could already tell. Delores becomes nicer to her staff and doesn’t insist on working them as hard, while Jesus resolves to stand up for himself more, especially when it comes to his Dad.
Jesus Job-Swap is another great reality TV show that promises to be essential viewing throughout. I haven’t enjoyed the company of Jesus this much since the time I sat on his lap in a shopping mall at Christmastime, all those years ago. And next week’s episode, in which Christ swaps roles with a Muslim cleric, promises to be even more volatile than this one!
Jesus Job-Swap is shown on DBC (Satellite Channel 148 between the Washroom Channel and the Bob Hope Underpants Auction Channel), Saturdays, 10:00pm, from now until Armageddon (six weeks tomorrow).
Saturday’s episode had Jesus swapping roles with Delores, owner of a small catering firm in California. As with most shows of this ilk, both participants were built up for a fall from the beginning, with the producers showing each of them oozing bravado and confidence at the task ahead. Jesus, for example, is unfazed by the prospect of having to cater a wedding reception for five hundred people the following week. “Five hundred people?” he asks, unimpressed. “I’ve had to feed ten times that before. No worries,” he laughs.
Delores was equally ebullient from the onset, quoting her “excellent man-management skills” as reasons why she’s more than qualified for the role of Son of God. She does warn, however, that while God may be the all-knowing, all-seeing creator of the universe, “He’s going to have to learn that I don’t take crap from anyone.”
But, as is always the case with these shows, neither Jesus nor Delores has an easy ride. In the course of the hour-long programme, the American woman learns that being figurehead for a belief system is no mean feat. Conversely, Jesus gets to know that the catering business isn’t a breeze, even for a man worshipped by millions of devotees.
It’s during these scenes that the best moments in Jesus Job-Swap arise. When the irate newlyweds confront the Son of God over his deviation from the agreed menu at their reception, it’s car-crash television; I couldn’t look away. As the bride violently asked why the steak tartare and scalloped potatoes had been replaced by a simple bread-and-fish meal, I thought for all the world that she was going to punch the earthly incarnation of the Creator. Luckily, fate intervened and an earthquake interrupted the fight.
Delores didn’t have it any easier, either. All the way through the episode she has to repeatedly tell her new boss that “you can treat your own son like that, Mister, but you can’t treat me like that!” She also becomes extremely fatigued at the task of making her face miraculously appear in food products, and in doing so, realises that being the Son of God isn’t all lambs and magic wine tricks. “There’s some self-sacrifice in this job, you know,” she tells the camera, wearily.
And ultimately, as with most shows of this genre, both participants learn many things about their switchee and about themselves, which in turn gives the viewer a sense of accomplishment and closure. Both Jesus and Delores realise things that we, the external viewers, could already tell. Delores becomes nicer to her staff and doesn’t insist on working them as hard, while Jesus resolves to stand up for himself more, especially when it comes to his Dad.
Jesus Job-Swap is another great reality TV show that promises to be essential viewing throughout. I haven’t enjoyed the company of Jesus this much since the time I sat on his lap in a shopping mall at Christmastime, all those years ago. And next week’s episode, in which Christ swaps roles with a Muslim cleric, promises to be even more volatile than this one!
Jesus Job-Swap is shown on DBC (Satellite Channel 148 between the Washroom Channel and the Bob Hope Underpants Auction Channel), Saturdays, 10:00pm, from now until Armageddon (six weeks tomorrow).
Thursday, 6 November 2008
The Gospel According to Richard
Since it was unearthed by an archaeological team in the Middle East earlier this year, The Gospel According to Richard has been making huge waves in God-bothering circles. Though many have doubted its authenticity, a team of scientists have analysed a tiny fragment of the codex with a carbon dating machine they stole from MIT, and have confirmed that the book is “really really old. Ancient. Donkey’s years. Even older than that, if you can imagine it.”
Since the age of the document is no longer in any question, translators and religious scholars have been hard at work assessing the content of the now-famous tome. Being no stranger to the Christian religion myself (we were introduced at a party in Kent fifteen years ago), I decided to look at The Gospel According to Richard, and see what I could deduce myself.
The Gospel is quite small when compared to many of the other books of the Old and New Testaments, but what it lacks in size, it gains in clarity. It mainly features Richard outlining his devotion to God, such as in the most widely quoted segment, which appears several times:
This section, which has influenced many people since the new gospel was unearthed, is very powerful. Indeed, the first time I read it to my cat, she was moved to tears. And my cat has been dead since I was a child. Such is the potency of these verses.
This main message of Richard’s Gospel seems to be that Richard is pointing out that religion is a two-way street, that if God scratches my back, I’ll scratch his. Or I would, if he was corporeal. Consider the opening chapter of the Gospel:
With a message so full of love and devotion, it is a shame that much of this book is damaged. Water damage seems to have been the cause of much of the ink running in this manuscript, leading to a section consisting of nothing but “Never going to give. Never going to give. Never going to give you up.”, repeated for several pages.
Theologians who question the veracity of this as a genuine Biblical book mostly refer to Chapter 5, verse 2, in which Richard says to God, “…don’t tell me that you are too blind to see it.” The nay-sayers quote this as theological balderdash, given that God is omniscient, or all seeing. Referring to Him as ‘blind’ constitutes a gross underestimation of His powers. The true believers counter with the argument that this verse should not be taken literally, that Richard is showing an early appreciation of irony, or that he is indicating that he knows that God is testing him, and by accusing Him of blindness he is having a joke at God’s expense. That wouldn’t be something I’d necessarily do myself, but there’s nowt as queer as folk, as my Mum would always say.
Indeed, The Gospel According to Richard is a goldmine for anyone interested in the apocryphal books of the Bible and the history of the Christian religion. From the opening verses (quoted above) to the final line (“And Richard spoke unto God: “Lord, call me ‘Rick’. It’s less formal, you see”), this contains lots of interesting things for theologians to ponder upon.
At least until we unearth Richard’s follow-up Gospel, Together Forever (With God).
Since the age of the document is no longer in any question, translators and religious scholars have been hard at work assessing the content of the now-famous tome. Being no stranger to the Christian religion myself (we were introduced at a party in Kent fifteen years ago), I decided to look at The Gospel According to Richard, and see what I could deduce myself.
The Gospel is quite small when compared to many of the other books of the Old and New Testaments, but what it lacks in size, it gains in clarity. It mainly features Richard outlining his devotion to God, such as in the most widely quoted segment, which appears several times:
And God spoke unto Richard, “How do I know you will continue to worship Me?”The Gospel According to Richard, Chapter 2, verses 1-9
And Richard spoke unto God, “My Lord, I just want to tell you what I am feeling. I have got to make you understand, for you are the Lord, my God.
I am never going to give you up.
I am never going to let you down.
I am never going to run around, nor will I ever desert you.
I will not give you reason to weep.
I will not say goodbye.
And I will never bear false witness
And hurt you.”
This section, which has influenced many people since the new gospel was unearthed, is very powerful. Indeed, the first time I read it to my cat, she was moved to tears. And my cat has been dead since I was a child. Such is the potency of these verses.
This main message of Richard’s Gospel seems to be that Richard is pointing out that religion is a two-way street, that if God scratches my back, I’ll scratch his. Or I would, if he was corporeal. Consider the opening chapter of the Gospel:
Richard spoke unto to God,The Gospel According to Richard, Chapter 1, verses 1-5
“We’re no strangers to theological devotion.
You know the commandments and so do I.
A full commitment is what I am thinking.
You would not get this from any other religious follower.”
With a message so full of love and devotion, it is a shame that much of this book is damaged. Water damage seems to have been the cause of much of the ink running in this manuscript, leading to a section consisting of nothing but “Never going to give. Never going to give. Never going to give you up.”, repeated for several pages.
Theologians who question the veracity of this as a genuine Biblical book mostly refer to Chapter 5, verse 2, in which Richard says to God, “…don’t tell me that you are too blind to see it.” The nay-sayers quote this as theological balderdash, given that God is omniscient, or all seeing. Referring to Him as ‘blind’ constitutes a gross underestimation of His powers. The true believers counter with the argument that this verse should not be taken literally, that Richard is showing an early appreciation of irony, or that he is indicating that he knows that God is testing him, and by accusing Him of blindness he is having a joke at God’s expense. That wouldn’t be something I’d necessarily do myself, but there’s nowt as queer as folk, as my Mum would always say.
Indeed, The Gospel According to Richard is a goldmine for anyone interested in the apocryphal books of the Bible and the history of the Christian religion. From the opening verses (quoted above) to the final line (“And Richard spoke unto God: “Lord, call me ‘Rick’. It’s less formal, you see”), this contains lots of interesting things for theologians to ponder upon.
At least until we unearth Richard’s follow-up Gospel, Together Forever (With God).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
