Who has got the cure for the sit-at-home blues? Ask Dr Grabthar. Now with bigger, easier to read font!

Sunday, June 19, 2005

[General] Scott Takes the Bishop by the Horns

ED: Hee hee, sorry I just realised that I said Brian Tamaki had horns in the title of this post. Complete accident I assure you (if you will, fate guided my hand).
The following post was actually an email written to me by Scott (ethicist, brother-in-law, way smarter than me) and has been published here with no permission being asked let alone given. Please enjoy.

Just some interesting bunch of announcements this weekend:

Brian Tamaki has decided to be a bishop:
I dunno why not Pope. It wouldn't be the first time the world has had two popes. Guess he needs something to work up to. Maybe he needs to "rescript" some more traditions before that. Meanwhile, his church wants to publish a video explaining the gay community to us (I still laugh every time I think of Murray Deaker talking about Lesbians "infiltrating NZs institutions". Paranoid Schizophrenics should not smoke weed whilst channel browsing from sky porn to the news).

Almost funny sidenote. Bishop Tamaki's first address after ascending to bishophood? 11PM, EST (I kid you not. They use EST), "First Fruits Service from our newly ordained Bishop Tamaki." I would have thought pope would be first fruit. Bishop should only be second or third fruit. Oh well.

Meanwhile TVNZ and RNZ can no longer really be taken seriously in terms of investigative reporting, as they can't do it in secret. Nice parting shot from ACT to ruin state owned journalism (Unless my Big Two predictions come to pass (ACT will stay in parliament using Nixon-esque escapades (Nixon-esquepades?), and National will win the election)).


ben.run said...

Here is something I got in email a while ago. I had been thinking about putting it on my blog, but then it would seem a little out of character from the rest of my blog so I haven't done so. However it might suit yours, so here it is, enjoy. Feel free to do whatever you want with it:

Dear Brian Tamaki,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from you and understand why you oppose same
sex marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between
a man a woman.

I try to share your knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone
tries to defend homosexual relationships, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I
do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of
God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Pacific Islanders, but not
Australians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Australians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in Her
period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I
tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, it creates a pleasing
odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is with my neighbours. They
claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself, or should I call up the police and ask them to do

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a
defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my
vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by
Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me
unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different
crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of
two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to
curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the
trouble ofgetting the whole town together to stone them? [Lev.24:10-16].
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we
do with people who sleep with their in-laws? [Lev.20:14]

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy
considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and

The Baron

Anonymous said...

Nice. Very much like the West Wing speech where Martin Sheen embassesses a radio personality. Note also that Brian says there is no biblical problem with having lots of money. Jesus said (Mark (10:17-27)) that it is easier for a camel to walk through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. So being rich is NOT a virtue. It is something that can be overcome, with patience and hard work. It may be forgiveable. But it is a vice. But Brian doesn't now, nor has he ever believed the bible. He believes whatever works. If he could make as much money as a buddhist, he'd be there (the buddhists can all give a collective "whew, dodged a bullet there"). So, Destiny Churchgoers, when Pope/Bishop Tamaki asks you to drink the cool-aid, take a pass.