Poor Joseph: God was a hard act to follow.

This is a genuine photo in the London Daily Mail of a billboard standing in front of St. Matthew-in-the-City, an Anglican church in downtown Auckland, New Zealand. It was in this morning’s Washington Post (sans photo) and there are multiple citations on the web.

It was put up during Christmas week by the church itself, in an attempt to spark discussion about faith in one of the world’s most secular countries, with 31% of the population non–religious, up from 27% in 2001. It has certainly sparked discussion about the propriety of the billboard itself. It was vandalized with paint a few hours after its debut, and has been torn down and replaced twice.

Archdeacon Glynn Cardy intended to challenge what he calls “stereotypes” about the virgin birth. His church teaches that Jesus had two human parents and was conceived in the conventional manner. In an interview he said, “We wanted to say to people who are on the margins: If you want to find out about God and Jesus, you don’t have to hang up your brain, you don’t have to believe in supernatural things. There are Christians who don’t believe God is a being in the sky who directs traffic on earth.”

He went on to say that to engage members of an increasingly secular society with topics such as virgin birth requires a demonstration that one does not take onerself too seriously. He doesn’t regret putting up the billboard or the debate it triggered, because “We knocked Santa off center stage… for a day or two.”


i don't think god would be a hard act to follow. god may be comforting and entertaining sometimes in bed, and i'm sure it was a thrill of a different sort when mary conceived of the holy spirit, but there comes a time, when every woman needs only the things that a real man can provide.

kudos to you joseph.
 
i don't think god would be a hard act to follow. god may be comforting and entertaining sometimes in bed, and i'm sure it was a thrill of a different sort when mary conceived

Perhaps you meant something very different from what I read-- But this really creeped me out.
 
. . . . telling the truth about a major lie that exists in the minds of the delusional?
It's entertaining to call religion a delusion. But if we ever want to do anything about it it would probably be more useful to remember that it is a collection of instincts that accrete various characteristics in different cultures.

It is not actually abnormal. Think of it as an evolutionary handicap. Passed down through a genetic bottleneck like Mitochondrial Eve or Y-Chromosome Adam. Or perhaps it was actually a survival trait in some long-ago era, an instinctive response to a danger that we can't imagine, and only the people who had it survived to breed.
Perhaps you meant something very different from what I read-- But this really creeped me out.
Why do we not use "crept" as the past tense of "creep" in this idiom? There is no such word as "creeped."

Besides, doesn't "crept me out" sound a whole lot... well... creepier?

Anglophones love irregular verbs. That's why we invented "snuck" for "sneaked" and "dove" for "dived," neither of which are authentic.
 
Why do we not use "crept" as the past tense of "creep" in this idiom? There is no such word as "creeped."

Besides, doesn't "crept me out" sound a whole lot... well... creepier?

Anglophones love irregular verbs. That's why we invented "snuck" for "sneaked" and "dove" for "dived," neither of which are authentic.

You just weirded me out, man...
 
to be offended at such a sign is a pure act of selfishness,be it theist or atheist..to be offended is to be self centered,self righteous,juvenile and just plain stupid..to those that find themselves being offended, i can only offer this piece of advice..GROW UP!
 
Back
Top