The moral of the story being, if there's a camera around, insist upon them waiting for you to change. But they'd all so earnestly and gently requested a gigabyte apiece of digital photos of themselves with an Indigenous Person. The photos are already plastered across the internet. And whereas everyone else is neatly, appropriately dressed, Indigenous Person is still in her cycling attire and desperately requiring of the services of a hairbrush.
So, if you read anywhere online that the traditional folkloric robes of Grace's City of Residence are reflective, slightly muddy and worn with grotty trainers... it was me wot started it. And you heard it here first.
Ah well. At least I wasn't naked. Small mercies...
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
Monday, 27 October 2008
Yet another post about Obama's alleged Revelation 13 Antichrist status
The whole saga of it all made it into the UK Guardian today. Given that the Guardian is a vaguely leftie paper still adhering to a tradition of considering itself too grown-up for God stuff, this is quite an acheivement.
Really, though, who is the Antichrist? Nobody you’ll find in the Bible, certainly. Revelation chapter 13 simply puts it as follows;
So, leaving Obama aside for now, how do we get from that to the fundamentalist concept of the Antichrist as a person? The reasoning goes that, since God is all big and powerful, and since (according both to Newton in physical science terms and to Huntington in geopolitical terms) no force can exist without being opposed by an equal and opposite force. And since no force can exist without being opposed by an equal and opposite force, and since God is all big and powerful, the one who opposes God must be all macho and testosterone-laden too. And since the beastie of Revelation chapter 13 is the machoest, scariest non-God figure in the entire Bible, then he must be drafted into the Antichrist post.
There's a problem with this already, though: fundamentalists aren't supposed to do reasoning. With fundamentalism, the myth and metaphor of texts such as Revelation, as Karen Armstrong explains far better than me, are mean to be read like science textbooks. So, as a fundamentalist wanting to assert a doctrine of the Antichrist, one can only fall back on revelation: the Antichrist is how he is because God told me. And in our cosy postmodern world which has become very comfortable with the idea of people hearing all sorts of mutually contradictory things from various higher powers, it's a hard thing to refute.
So far be it for me to deny the existence for you of the Antichrist.
But how does Obama come into it? Well, in very much the same sort of way that Charles I of England came into it when people didn't want him in charge either. In both cases, God appears to have very specifically to have likened the Antichrist to the unwanted leader. And many, many times in between.
Maybe, though, God or those to whom he prophesied made some mistakes. After all, I have no grounds upon which to pronounce Obama not to be this mythically-constructed figure which some might attach the name of "Antichrist". After all, it's all convincing stuff;
Really, though, who is the Antichrist? Nobody you’ll find in the Bible, certainly. Revelation chapter 13 simply puts it as follows;
And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority ... The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world...
So, leaving Obama aside for now, how do we get from that to the fundamentalist concept of the Antichrist as a person? The reasoning goes that, since God is all big and powerful, and since (according both to Newton in physical science terms and to Huntington in geopolitical terms) no force can exist without being opposed by an equal and opposite force. And since no force can exist without being opposed by an equal and opposite force, and since God is all big and powerful, the one who opposes God must be all macho and testosterone-laden too. And since the beastie of Revelation chapter 13 is the machoest, scariest non-God figure in the entire Bible, then he must be drafted into the Antichrist post.
There's a problem with this already, though: fundamentalists aren't supposed to do reasoning. With fundamentalism, the myth and metaphor of texts such as Revelation, as Karen Armstrong explains far better than me, are mean to be read like science textbooks. So, as a fundamentalist wanting to assert a doctrine of the Antichrist, one can only fall back on revelation: the Antichrist is how he is because God told me. And in our cosy postmodern world which has become very comfortable with the idea of people hearing all sorts of mutually contradictory things from various higher powers, it's a hard thing to refute.
So far be it for me to deny the existence for you of the Antichrist.
But how does Obama come into it? Well, in very much the same sort of way that Charles I of England came into it when people didn't want him in charge either. In both cases, God appears to have very specifically to have likened the Antichrist to the unwanted leader. And many, many times in between.
Maybe, though, God or those to whom he prophesied made some mistakes. After all, I have no grounds upon which to pronounce Obama not to be this mythically-constructed figure which some might attach the name of "Antichrist". After all, it's all convincing stuff;
According to The Book of Revelations: The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything. And Now: For the award winning Act of Stupidity Of all times the People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet -- The Presidency of the United states of America .. A Male of Muslim descent who is the most extremely liberal Senator in Congress (in other words an extremist) and in his 40s.Whatever. But what I still don't get and can't get my head around is how one can reconcile all the obsessing about evil and all the hate-mongering, scapegoating and bile that seems to accompany all such Antichrist searching. Where does the love which Jesus kept going on and on and on about, where does that come into it? Where's it all gone...?
Sunday, 26 October 2008
a very silly blog post
I tried to create the as-suggested-by-lampbus Box Z. And yet, the more I read and re-read the blurb attached to the question, the more I realised that adding another box would not pass me the assignment. And so, I asked the parrots, and, as Steve predicted, they know exactgly what box to fit me into. And they told me to take option C.
So the assignment's all dusted away. Now, let's see if I pass...
So the assignment's all dusted away. Now, let's see if I pass...
Friday, 24 October 2008
the problem of studying something which doesn't involve God
One of the most delightful things about academic study involving anything to do with God, theology or faith, is that one can never be wrong. This is because you're dealing with a Being or beings or concepts which, whether they exist or not, exist beyond the limits of human language or understanding. Therefore, one can never be proved to be factually incorrect. One is assesssed purely on one's capacity to reason or argue the point, regardless of the utter crap one may be spouting. This is why, of course, so many Religious Studies graduates apply for advertising internships and end up at law school when they're turned down. Nothing is wrong, everything is possible and most people have the potential to be persuaded of absolutely anything.
By contrast, I'm now sitting here utterly infuriated by the assignment for this course I'm currently doing. The question is clearly phrased, offering one of five possible answers A-E to be explained in only 300 words. And I don't know which of A, B, C, D or E it is because I don't understand B, C or E. And I'm not used to not being able to get away with not understanding by simply justifying why I've written something else instead. And I'm not used to the way in which I've read endless reams about the subject matter won't necessarily help. If I don't pick the "correct" answer I will fail the course, and if I fail the course I will have to keep retaking it until I pass and if I don't pass eventually I will lose my job. Not everything is possible, and eveything other than what's right is wrong.
I'm sure that, with some more thorough reading of the textbooks and a few phone calls to people who can help me understand B, C and E, I will get there. But I'm really, really not used to this...
By contrast, I'm now sitting here utterly infuriated by the assignment for this course I'm currently doing. The question is clearly phrased, offering one of five possible answers A-E to be explained in only 300 words. And I don't know which of A, B, C, D or E it is because I don't understand B, C or E. And I'm not used to not being able to get away with not understanding by simply justifying why I've written something else instead. And I'm not used to the way in which I've read endless reams about the subject matter won't necessarily help. If I don't pick the "correct" answer I will fail the course, and if I fail the course I will have to keep retaking it until I pass and if I don't pass eventually I will lose my job. Not everything is possible, and eveything other than what's right is wrong.
I'm sure that, with some more thorough reading of the textbooks and a few phone calls to people who can help me understand B, C and E, I will get there. But I'm really, really not used to this...
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
something Grace could never have made up
Before I begin, this is not one of those posts-in-which-Grace-takes-liberty-with-the-facts-to-tell-a-good-story. This happened. This actually took place.
The scene is set in GRACE's office. GRACE is deep in concentration on the computer. Her mobile rings (ringtone: Hallelujah Chorus) and GRACE fumbles in her pocket to answer.
GRACE: Hello?
FORMER LINE MANAGER FROM PLACE OF FORMER EMPLOYMENT (FLMFPOFE): Grace?
GRACE: FLMFPOFE!
FLMFPOFE: Grace, we've heard you're now working in research!
GRACE: Er, yes.. sort of. How are you? How's the family? How's everything?
FLMFPOFE: Fine. But listen love, we've got something to ask you.
GRACE: Er, go on...
FLMFPOFE: We need some research done.
GRACE: Um, OK...
FLMFPOFE: Research into, you know, how to reach the community, extend the Kingdom.
GRACE: Great.
FLMFPOFE: Could you help us?
GRACE: Er, yes, of course. But... what sort of research are you wanting.
FLMFPOFE: It's about parrots....
GRACE: Right...
FLMFPOFE: ...and about their potential in evangelism.
GRACE: What an, um, interesting, er, different idea.
FLMFPOFE: We'd be wanting you to interview the parrots.
GRACE: Er (pauses) yesssss.
FLMFPOFE: So would you do it for us? As a piece of research? Now?
GRACE: Wh-what sort of timescale are you wanting when you say, like, when you say 'now'?
FLMFPOFE: Really, really soon as possible. It's an urgent thing. We need to reach the communit here for Christ. There are young, young mums dying, you know how it is...
GRACE: Well, sometimes these things take a while to work out. We might want to sit down together to put a proposal together. Given that we're talking about interviewing, we'll have to run it through a research ethics committee.
FLMFPOFE: Oh no. I've looked it up online. The guidelines say that if you're using between 38 and 1008 parrots you don't need ethical approval.
BELOVED: (shaking GRACE awake) Graceeeeeeeeey? Darling? It's raining ... I'm not due in till 10 this morning ... would you like a lift ... shall I have a shower first...?
GRACE: (yawning) Urghm... yesss... what-what time is it?
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
could anyone spare some prayer?
A Very Dear Friend of mine has a Significant Deadline in 17 1/2 hours and an overwhelming amount of it all to write in the meantime. A long, long story.. but well, if it all had happened to you, you'd be equally as frantic at 17 1/2 hours before deadline. So please, prayers would be most, most appreciated. Thanks.
Even with the Lord on your side, a bit of sex appeal still helps
The scene is set in the lobby of GRACE's department. Four MALE MAINTENANCE/SECURITY STAFF are crowded round the widescreen television, which they have switched from BBC News 24 to FOX News. Sarah Palin is speaking and they are watching, breathless.
GRACE, having just locked herself out of her office, enters quietly from stage left.
GRACE: Um, excuse me...
MAINTENANCE/SECURITY STAFF do not respond
GRACE: (raising her voice slightly) Er, sorry to disturb you, but...
All four MALE MAINTENANCE/SECURITY STAFF slowly turn around, cringeing and all red-faced, looking as though they'd been caught reading Page 3 of The Sun .
GRACE, having just locked herself out of her office, enters quietly from stage left.
GRACE: Um, excuse me...
MAINTENANCE/SECURITY STAFF do not respond
GRACE: (raising her voice slightly) Er, sorry to disturb you, but...
All four MALE MAINTENANCE/SECURITY STAFF slowly turn around, cringeing and all red-faced, looking as though they'd been caught reading Page 3 of The Sun .
Monday, 20 October 2008
Grace sees her old job advertised and starts thinking
Before I left Place of Former Employment, I'd written, upon their request, a few bullet points suggesting how the structure of the role could be improved. So now that they're advertising, I'm aching to read their job description and person spec. Not in a voyeurisic, titilating way... but because, with the role properly set up and managed, so much more could be achieved.
Each time I've been back to the neighbourhood - and it has only been a few times - I see people I knew, lived alongside, worked with. When I was cycling back through there earlier this week, it was the little, little boy whose Mam's funeral was in my last week who stopped me to say hello. I still didn't know what to say to him, even now.
Could Place of Former Employment have prevented Mam's death? I still can't decide. It's a question, essentially, of how much we believe the c/Church can do, of how much influence and/or impact the c/Church can, could, should have over one or an Other's life, a question set against that of free will versus determinism and/or personal, social, state responsibility... and really, I don't know any more. All I know is that now all I seem able to do is pray for that family, and from my cozy new abode three miles yet half a world away, that seems so... well, inadequate...
Each time I've been back to the neighbourhood - and it has only been a few times - I see people I knew, lived alongside, worked with. When I was cycling back through there earlier this week, it was the little, little boy whose Mam's funeral was in my last week who stopped me to say hello. I still didn't know what to say to him, even now.
Could Place of Former Employment have prevented Mam's death? I still can't decide. It's a question, essentially, of how much we believe the c/Church can do, of how much influence and/or impact the c/Church can, could, should have over one or an Other's life, a question set against that of free will versus determinism and/or personal, social, state responsibility... and really, I don't know any more. All I know is that now all I seem able to do is pray for that family, and from my cozy new abode three miles yet half a world away, that seems so... well, inadequate...
Sunday, 19 October 2008
Happy Birthday Dear Blo-ogletttttttttt
Yes, today is the first birthday of my blog. What a difference a year makes. What a difference. And God has been very, very good. I'm saving my readers from me going all slushy and introspective by the embarrassment of having been utterly AWOL in an intense love triangle with both New Job and Beloved for the past three weeks... and to those to whom I owe phone calls, emails, wine or coffee, I'm very very sorry.
Maybe on the second birthday of my blog I'll reveal the never-yet-told-online story of why I really started it up. But in the meantime, here's a birthday cake. Do grab a plate and all help yourselves to a slice...
Maybe on the second birthday of my blog I'll reveal the never-yet-told-online story of why I really started it up. But in the meantime, here's a birthday cake. Do grab a plate and all help yourselves to a slice...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)