KFC mocks baptism in an U.K. ad

All I can say about this is that I am glad that I cook at home and never stop at KFC.

From Premier Christian News,  

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has received close to 600 complaints over KFC's new advert, with some viewers accusing the brand of belittling Christianity and mocking baptisms.

The two-minute commercial, titled 'All Hail Gravy Part 2', is part of KFC's ongoing 'Believe' campaign in the UK., developed by the London-based advertising agency 'Mother'.

The ad has stirred controversy for depicting a man being submerged in a lake of gravy as part of a ritual, which some have interpreted as a parody of religious baptism practices. 

The commercial begins with a man encountering a chicken in a forest before following a group carrying a large golden egg. He is led to a lake where a woman immerses him in gravy, an act that transforms him into a chicken mini fillet.

KFC has described the ad as a “modern-day fable” intended to highlight the strong connection between KFC fans and the brand’s Original Recipe Chicken, as well as its signature gravy.

Monica Silic, KFC’s Chief Marketing Officer for the UK and Ireland, told Adweek that the campaign was designed to inspire "fandom" and bring "lightness and levity to the chaotic world" through the brand’s core products.

However, the ad has faced backlash for its disturbing imagery and perceived religious overtones.

Critics have expressed their discomfort, with one commentator on Marketing Beat calling the ad "disgraceful", accusing it of promoting “cultism, cannibalism, grooming" and describing it as "degrading and disturbing". 

The ad’s use of religious language, including billboards featuring a chicken dipper being "divinely dunked" into gravy, has further fueled controversy.

It comes on the heels of a previous KFC campaign in 2014 which also sparked complaints over a commercial that included a song with the lyric "all our stupid songs" performed by the KFC choir.

At the time, the ASA cleared KFC of any wrongdoing, stating the ad was a lighthearted commentary on the frustrations older individuals may feel towards carol singers.

Psalm 32

This Sunday's Psalm is number 32, Beati quorum. This is the way that I read it.

In the first two verses the psalmist (David) speaks to the congregation. 

1 Happy are they whose transgressions are forgiven, *

and whose sin is put away!

2 Happy are they to whom the Lord imputes no guilt, *

and in whose spirit there is no guile!

Next, he speaks to the Lord.

3 While I held my tongue, my bones withered away, *

because of my groaning all day long.

4 For your hand was heavy upon me day and night; *

my moisture was dried up as in the heat of summer.

5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you, *

and did not conceal my guilt.

6 I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord." *

Then you forgave me the guilt of my sin.

7 Therefore all the faithful will make their prayers to you in

time of trouble; *

when the great waters overflow, they shall not reach them.

8 You are my hiding-place;

you preserve me from trouble; *

you surround me with shouts of deliverance.

Then the Lord answers him.

9 "I will instruct you and teach you in the way that you

should go; *

I will guide you with my eye.

10 Do not be like horse or mule, which have no understanding; *

who must be fitted with bit and bridle,

or else they will not stay near you."

Finally, we hear the psalmist sing to us,

11 Great are the tribulations of the wicked; *

but mercy embraces those who trust in the Lord.

12 Be glad, you righteous, and rejoice in the Lord; *

shout for joy, all who are true of heart.

"If it continues long enough, denial is deadly"

 Mark Marshall recently posted about the dangers of denial and used the Episcopal organization's history as an example. What he really points out is the problem with the pewsitters who may be in denial of the theological error, and the resulting tolerance of erroneous innovations, heresy, etc.

But first an old joke. It is probably better said than written, but goes something like this. One Sunday, Reginald and Regina Churchgoer go to their usual church and sit down in their usual spots as they had for decades. When it comes time for the service to begin, the procession includes pride flags and rainbow banners. Then the non-binary priest says, “In the name of our manifold-gendered God, the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Sanctifier along with all of your God-selfs, Amen. The Mother of us all be with you . . .” For the scripture lessons, the Koran is read for one and the Bhagavad Gita for another. But there’s more. When the time nears for the consecration, there is an even newer innovation. Drag queen liturgical dancers sprinkle milk on the communion table.

At that point, Reginald grumbles to Regina, “I swear, if they commit one more abomination…”

Of course, part of the joke is that the Churchgoers have watched their church go step by step into apostasy and abomination through the years and did nothing except keep going to that church, sitting down in that same pew, and dropping their offerings in the plate. Though of a conservative mindset and giving an occasional grumble, they never put their foot down or walked out and likely never will. They were used to that church and somehow felt safe continuing to attend there.

The Churchgoers could have been 20th and 21st Century Episcopalians. When Bishop Pike and later Bishop Spong espoused blatant and very public heresies, denying just about every basic tenet of The Faith, rank and file Episcopalians wrote them off — “That’s just one nutty bishop.” They might have preferred Pike and Spong be disciplined but were not that concerned when they were not. Episcopalians are open-minded after all.

Then when bishop after bishop and diocese after diocese made it difficult for orthodox parishes to keep orthodox by taking away their Prayer Books and then running off orthodox priests and ordinands, those in dioceses that were safer (for a time) said, “That is those dioceses. Our diocese is fine, and our bishop is a good man.”

The consecration of partnered gay Gene Robinson as bishop finally shook up the Episcopal Church and led many to leave and form the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). But many orthodox and somewhat orthodox still stayed. My parish, being the only non-TEC Anglican parish in town, expected unhappy Episcopalians to come our way. But few did. And Ephraim Radner was among those who insisted the orthodox should stay. And many, again, said, “That’s one bishop.” And, after all, perhaps their bishop did not approve of consecrating Gene Robinson.

But before long, it became close to impossible for a relatively orthodox diocese to elect an orthodox bishop and receive the necessary consents from the other bishops. And still some orthodox remain in The Episcopal Church, saying, “That’s not my parish.” And now there is even this Redeemed Zoomer character posting that orthodox Anglicans should return to TEC.

Denial upon denial upon denial. The results were:

Inaction or feeble action against apostasy while it was still feasible to combat it within TEC. When some finally did take action, it was already too late for The Episcopal Church. Many suffered as a result.

Once orthodox dioceses and parishes being overrun.

Resulting danger to souls accompanied by disobedience to the commands of Scripture to reject and evict false teachers from the church. (2 John 10, 11)

The death of a once august denomination.

In short, if it continues long enough, denial is deadly.

While I was never in denial and was never accepting of the innovations, the vast majority of my fellow pewsitters in my former parish were quite content to sit there in silent assent.

I have said before that tolerance leads to acceptance which leads to affirmation and eventually blessing.

Don't deny it.  

You have to wonder...

After reviewing this Sunday's reading from 1 Corinthians 10:1-13, I had to wonder what revisionist preachers and their pewsitters would be thinking about parts of Paul's advice. See if you can pick out what I am talking about.

I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness.

Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not become idolaters as some of them did; as it is written, ‘The people sat down to eat and drink, and they rose up to play.’ We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did, and were destroyed by serpents. And do not complain as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages have come. So if you think you are standing, watch out that you do not fall. No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it.

Of course it is the warning to not indulge in sexual immorality that caught my attention. In Paul's day this would involve things like adultery, incest, lust, and homosexual acts. Our culture and many churches have accepted most of these, with the exception of incest, as perfectly fine and in the case of homosexual acts, something to be celebrated.

These days our revisionist friends have not just redefined sexual immorality, they have removed it from the lexicon.

So, when confronted with those strange words of St. Paul, the revisionist preacher can conveniently ignore them or treat them as relics of an unenlightened age. 

Paul would call that putting "Christ to the test".

You have to wonder what people will be thinking when they listen to 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 this Sunday.

A God of the people, by the people, and for the people

It seems that the American increasingly favor a god of their own creation.

From Premier Christian News,

A study by the Cultural Research Center has revealed that 'Christianity' in America is becoming an increasingly vague term, as only 40% of Americans believe God exists and influences human lives.

Even for those who believe, an increasing number say they are hesitant to “develop intimacy” with God, or allow Him to impact their lifestyle choices.

Two-thirds of American adults identify as “Christian” – yet only 16% of those surveyed say that God is the “most important” element of their life.

Of those who believe in God’s existence, 30 million reject the notion that He is actively involved in every aspect of their life, whilst over 80 million admit they do not have an intimate, interactive relationship with Him.

When asked what the God of the Bible provides to them, a majority of believers said He supplies hope (72%), comfort (71%), love (70%), peace (65%), guidance (64%), compassion (60%), joy (60%), and mercy (58%)...

...Barna describes the figures as “shocking”, saying that the survey indicates a widespread version of ‘Christianity’ which has little to do with God – and more to do with nominal cultural markers.

Author and research director, Dr George Barna says: “When you put all of these insights together, we understand we have fashioned the God of the Bible to be a deity reconfigured into our own image in order to fit within our personal comfort zone.

“[Therefore], the trials and tribulations, as well as the multifaceted demise of the nation, come into sharper focus.”

A god of the people, by the people, and for the people huh?

How well is that working out for us?

A god that fits within your comfort zone is not the God of the Bible.  

So how do you keep God as the "most important" element in your life?

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

 

Jerusalem 2022 during our visit

This Sunday's reading is from Luke 13:31-35 in which Jesus foretells his entrance into Jerusalem, 

At that very hour some Pharisees came and said to him, ‘Get away from here, for Herod wants to kill you.’ He said to them, ‘Go and tell that fox for me, “Listen, I am casting out demons and performing cures today and tomorrow, and on the third day I finish my work. Yet today, tomorrow, and the next day I must be on my way, because it is impossible for a prophet to be killed away from Jerusalem.” Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you. And I tell you, you will not see me until the time comes when you say, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.” ’

Jesus knew what awaited him. We were lucky to travel there when the risk to our lives was relatively low.  

 

Endorsing blasphemy: What else would you expect from an old Marxist?

As if I needed any more reasons to disagree with U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, he added them this week.

From Ben Johnson at The Washington Stand,

Over the weekend, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the most popular Democratic presidential hopeful of the last decade, thanked a trans-identifying musician for belting out a blasphemous song that accused God of rape, demeaned the Crucifixion, and insulted the Virgin Mary.

The lead singer of the group Against Me! — a man born Tom Gabel, who now calls himself “Laura Jane Grace” — put the “punk” in punk rocker when he debuted his new single, “Your God (God’s D**k)” at the Bernie Sanders “Fighting Oligarchy” rally in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last Friday, March 7.

“Does your God have a big, fat [organ]? ‘Cause it feels like He’s f****** me!” grunted “Grace” gracelessly. The rest of the sloppy lyrics formed a litany of mishmashed heresy, LGBTQ fetishism, and anti-Christian bile attacking the Bible’s scientifically accurate view of biological sex. The song portrayed God engaging in sodomy and “other kinks,” mocked the Virgin Mary, and besmirched the Crucifixion by conflating Christ being hung on a cross with a slang biological term. (You can read more of the lyrics, if you have the stomach, here.)

Perceptive observers viewed this pro-trans, anti-Christian blasphemy at a socialist rally as a window into the far-Left’s deepest political fantasies which, like their sexual fetishes, they would like to normalize at the national level. 

Disgusting, but quite consistent with the old Marxist dream of a world without religion. 

Why did Bernie thank the singer? Remember when Bernie answered this question,

The following exchange took place between Anderson Cooper of CNN and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in the March debate in Flint, Michigan:

Cooper: “Senator Sanders, are you intentionally keeping your Jewish faith in the background during your campaign?”

Sanders: “I am very proud to be Jewish, and being Jewish is so much of what I am. Look, my father’s family was wiped out by Hitler in the Holocaust. I know about what crazy and radical and extremist politics mean. I learned that lesson as a tiny, tiny child when my mother would take me shopping and we would see people working in stores who had numbers on their arms because they were in Hitler’s concentration camps. I am very proud of being Jewish, and that is an essential part of who I am as a human being.” (Christianity Today)

 But not essential enough for him to call out this blasphemous performance.