If you made a list of Christian leaders that are ripe for satirical treatment, theologian D.A. Carson would be somewhere near the bottom. Although Carson has written or edited more than 45 books and is a distinguished New Testament scholar, he isn't exactly a household name. But in the hothouse world of evangelical academia--particularly at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS)--Carson is revered for his brilliant mind and prodigious output.
It is these qualities that appear to have inspired one blogger to make an amusing--and seemingly controversial--fake blog dedicated to the TEDS professor.
The Secret Diary of D. A. Carson is a hyperbole-driven site written from the perspective of Carson and focused on his "awesomeness" (...originally my parents named me Donald Arthur, but I had the "A." legally changed to "Awesome" in 1978 shortly after I definitively defeated J.I. Packer in a game of badminton. Old goat never even saw it coming....).
The inside jokes usually require a familiarity with TEDS and evangelical academia, though occasionally the names dropped are more familiar. For example, one entry relates FakeCarson's phone call with another famous Christian thinker:
I answered because I figured it was probably just John Piper calling for his weekly pep talk. I love the guy, but he has very little confidence in his preaching ability so he calls me regularly for some encouragement.
His preaching style is a little dry and I always feel like I to fib a little to make him feel better about himself:
"No John, I think it's good that you never use humor when you preach."
"No John, no one was sleeping while you were prattling on about T.U.L.I.P."
"Yes, John, I agree that preaching is most effective when you constantly shame your audience and never crack a smile."
Other times the satire is almost poignant. In a response to a question about how the professors at TEDS choose which books to use for texts, FakeCarson writes,
Well, let me explain a few things to you. Sure, it's better to read proponents of these heretical views if you want to truly understand all of their strengths and weaknesses. But we don't always want you to understand them. Sometimes we just want you to know they're really, really bad.
Perhaps an illustration will help. You probably know what a wood chipper is, but you don't really know exactly how it works. Sure, you could walk up to one, stick your hand or arm in it and really try to understand all the ins and outs of it. Or you could just watch this scene from Fargo and realize that you shouldn't have anything to do with a wood chipper. Understanding all the intricacies of a wood chipper doesn't help keep your hand from getting torn off when you stick it in.
So in answer to your question, CQC, Open Theism and the New Perspective are just like wood chippers.
The funniest entries are the ones that play off the insecurities students have when confronting legendary teachers. Responding to a real comment on RateMyProfessor.com, FakeCarson writes,
As a matter of fact, sometimes I even ask you guys questions that I didn't actually lecture on. The funny thing? Whenever you ask if we covered it in class, I'm adamant that we did and I'll even tell you the exact date we "covered it." Then I watch you act like you suddenly remember us going over it now. Priceless!
The humor can be biting, though rarely disrespectful. Still, not everyone at TEDS is charmed. The latest post notes that the TEDS administration "has been working pretty hard to get us to shut this site down."
It is this controversy that raises interesting questions for the Christian blogosphere.
Many of us enjoy celebrity-based internet memes like Chuck Norris Facts (Sample: "There is no theory of evolution. Just a list of creatures Chuck Norris has allowed to live.") or the Fred Thompson Facts (Sample: "Not only does Fred Thompson cut taxes, he cuts tax collectors."). Such public figures expect this sort of notoriety and tend to take in good humor. But are "celebrities of the Church", particularly respected leaders, off-limits? Should we refrain from making them the targets for such frivolity? Does it diminish their role or offend their reputation?
Initially, I thought the TEDS administration was being overly stuffy and lacked a sense of humor. Now I'm not so sure. Maybe they responded properly and I am the one who has become desensitized and addicted to satire.
I'm curious to know what other Christian bloggers think about this situation. Did TEDS overreact? Should bloggers refrain from taking humorous jibes at church leaders? Where do we draw the lines?
It's all in good fun, Joe. As long as it stays clean and isn't mean, I say "have at it."
My question is Why? To what end? Poking fun at someone can become nasty if it is done repeatedly. I don't know anyone who enjoys being the butt of a joke,even a very clever one, over and over and over. Has this blog stepped over the line of do unto others?
This stuff would either go away or be of minimal impact if it is ignored. Making it more public makes it more visible. I predict it to die quickly because Carson isn't well-enough recognized.
Collin
http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com
None of us should take ourselves TOO SERIOUSLY! We are all human and subject to human foibles and vanities to which we can all relate. Let us rejoice in our eccentricities, for the Lord God made us all! But not in mean-spiritedness... we should do nothing that is not based upon love.
Humor is sometimes the knife that is needed to get to the truth, or at least cut off other people's blinders so they can see the truth.
As with all things, it really depends on their motivation for creating the satire.
Two questions:
1) Did Jesus tell jokes? or laugh at them?
2) Have you ever (never?) listened to what passes for humor in the average church choir during rehearsals or services?
I think it's funny. Carson, and the TEDS faculty, should be flattered not offended.
I read through the whole site, and I don't remember noticing anything funny. Isn't satire supposed to be at least a little humorous?
I should add that I'm a big fan of satire as it's done at Scrappleface, the Holy Observer, and the Onion. This isn't anything like that. Making a godly man out to be arrogant doesn't make good satire. Satire can only be funny if it has a grain of truth to it. God has gifted Carson in ways that would go to many people's heads, but the fact that this seems to be the furthest thing from how it's affected Carson makes it seem very strange that one of the hallmarks of the blog is to make him a self-absorbed jerk.
Pretty funny stuff (for Christians anyway). I'd like to see FakeMohler, FakeColson, FakeDobson, and FakeCarter.
To answer post #6, there is no record in the New Testament of Jesus ever laughing or even smiling. For that matter, I can't think of any character in the Bible, including God, smiling or laughing, except for mocking laughter.
"I can't think of any character in the Bible, including God, smiling or laughing, except for mocking laughter."
Come on, you guys are supposed to know this stuff. I'm an atheist and even I can remember a few times where people laughed in the Bible.
Here's one: Genesis 18:12 - 18:13
Argh, my comments aren't going through. Here's another try.
An example of laughter in the bible: Genesis 18:12-18:13
If you feel they are brothers in Christ then it is fair to present some good natured satire. We do it all the time (Like me to you and the reverse, Tim). But if I have serious issues, and I think they are genuinely deceived, and I really desire to confront them on a basis of respect, then I have a problem with satire that is meant to demean.
Good satire: So a Calvinist and an Arminian walked into a MacDonalds. The Calvnist says to the cashier “You make the choice for me”. The Arminian gazes at the menu and says “So much to choose from!”
Bad satire: The speaker at the emergent pastor’s conference opened by asking everyone to open their Bibles. He suddenly realized no one had one.
There is a difference. One pokes fun, the other is meant to demean.
I don't know what to think, so I'll just note that I really liked the Calvinist/Arminian joke in the above comment. :-)
The second one could have been made funny if it ended, "half an hour later, when the laptops had booted, he continued." Or if you could work in a gag about everyone looking for words to the Windows opening theme. . . .
Cheers!
PGE
The apostle Paul chastised the circumcusion group, saying, "I wish they'd go the whole way and emasculate themselves!"
If Paul enjoyed this freedom, then we can, too, as long as it does not become sinful
I think that context is important. Who is your audience? What or who is the subject of the satire? I've tried with very limited success to write my own satire about one of my employers (a large midwestern bank). Some of it worked, like when I lampooned the company "newsletter" crowing about how denimn can now be worn on Friday. Some of it was harder such as making our bank acquiring another bank sound like a trade made in baseball (bank a acquired bank b for $500 million in cash, stock and two VP's to be named later).
I tried to model Scrappleface's approach and if you read it long enough, some of it works and is spot on and some of it doesn't work at all. To answer the question, some leaders in the church can be poked fun at, but it should be done with the utmost caution and respect. Once again, know your audience and the subject of the satire.
Scrappleface is way more vitriolic than anything I've seen on the Fake Carson page. That dude practically crucifies anyone who is not 100% conservative evangelical. He steps over the line all the time ... why is satire all of a sudden wrong if the people satirized are church leaders?
A camel going through the eye of a needle may not seem funny to us now, but I'll bet it killed in AD 30.
What's the difference between a calvinist and a terrorist?
You can negotiate with the terrorist.
Was that bad satire or good satire?
People need to lighten up.
And yes, I believe Jesus did laugh at jokes. Prove that he didn't.
Want some rapture humor? Dave MacPherson has a couple items on Google etc.: "You May Be a Rapture Redneck" and "An Exciting Day at Rapture Bible College." I've seen them on some other engines also. But neither Walvoord nor LaHaye has approved of them. Irv
As one who recently saw D. A. Carson at this spring's PCRT, I was awed at his erudition and knowledge, but also surprised at the deference paid him by the other speakers - no slouches in their own right. (Example: during the Q&A session it became a sort of laughing matter with the audience that the whenever a speaker answered a question, he virtually always ended with, "Anything to add, Don?")
Although Carson himself seemed as humble as they come, I can see how such deference may set him up for such parody.