August 16, 2005

Reality-Based Faith-Based Programming

Sunday, 20 Sweltring (Wedmath, sorta) 2005

We see by way of cyberfriend War Liberal that there is now a version of American Idol for preachers. Seriously. To begin with, there is nothing reality-based about administering the faith - almost by definition.* Faith says that this is so because I believe that it is so, even though I cannot prove that it is so. Which sidesteps bothering with those pesky facts all the time when you're trying to engage in reasoned debate. Or so goes the winding thread of some of the more reality challenged faith based rationalists.

We would also like to point out that engaging in a competition to see who is the best preacher in order to win valuable prizes seems to us to be a tad, um, what's the word? - oh yeah - blasphemous. Sort of giving the lie to the saying money is the root of all evil - if that is the case, why are these supposed representatives of the Invisible Cloud Being vying for ill-gotten gains?

As some of you might be aware, we don't watch much of the swill spewing out of the idiot box**, and we haven't for some time. We still manage to catch some sporting events on ten second tape delay live, and we do still watch some of the pap oozing into our living room. But we've never been part of the survivor fanatics, and the whole reality show boom, coming right after an strike within the entertainment business, and conveniently forcing their salaries down so that more money could go into people like Eisner, showed us the way things were going in the television show building business. They were being Walmartized, the same way that the rest of those ensared in that boom (cough coughautoindustryfastfoodindustryrestofretailerscough cough) were in the nineties. So a reality (cough) show about snake oil salesmen desecrators of their own faith preachers? Hopefully they'll turn the cameras off when the little boys are led into the vestry...

* - we do realize that there is very little, if anything, that is reality-based within the current lineup of reality-based shows. We also recall having simliar discussions with ardent fans of the sport (cough) of professional wrestling.

** - a cherished family nickname for the television. We even had black and white idiot boxes in the day...

Posted by (: Tom :) at August 16, 2005 06:17 AM
Comments

Gee really great stuff Tommy Bob .....
btw, from a guy that produces some of that "swill" you seem to be such a critic of ...
It sure seem like I'm hearing just another pitch from a guy who wants a show ...lol!!

Please fight the urge to write me back, I am NOT giving you a show ...and besides I only work with agents ...be strong ...I was only preaching!

MidnightCabbie.myblogsite.com

Doc Wright
Associate Producer
LCA Films
Sky Walker Ranch
Marin county, California

Posted by: doc wright at August 17, 2005 02:57 PM

Lol! I'm sure that just about everything seems like a pitch to someone engaged in that sort of thing. And that being a producer of such high quality entertainment gives you that certain sense of pride in your work. I mean, who wouldn't be proud of trying to get couples to cheat on each other, getting people to eat worms and bugs on live television, and rat each other out so that they can win a million bucks?

What sort of show would it seem like I'm pitching to you exactly? Funny - I don't notice any sort of attempt to try and whore myself out to Hollyweird in the post I just wrote. MAybe a few bong hits of whatever it is you're smoking might help me to understand...

Please fight the urge to make moronic comments at blogs. If the quality of the shows you produce matches the quality of the comment you left here, I'm surprised you're employed at all. Then again, Tucker Carlson still has a show, right?

Posted by: (: Tom :) at August 17, 2005 05:12 PM

While I do agree the reality-based/faith based concept is lame, it's actually atheists who have to have faith, not those who believe in God. There are many sound theistic evidences and proofs that you have to disprove before you can say faith is just "I believe this because." Some of the greatest minds that have ever lived have been satisfied intellectually that Christianity is valid and based on history. In fact, the burden of proof is on the non-believer because they are trying to prove a negative (there is no God) which is very difficult to do. There isn't any evidence for atheism and you can't logically prove there is no God. Atheism is merely an intellectual position. So who is "reality challenged"? Non-believers.

I have yet to read "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" by Norman Geisler, but I know it includes a lot of science and history in relation to the Bible. Maybe you should check it out.

In love,
THE ZONER

Posted by: The Zoner at August 17, 2005 07:59 PM

I would like to say that it seems that most of us feel we have to have faith in something. A lot of metaphysical thought has gone into the question of whether we can prove that anything exists outside of our own perceptions.

I thought the whole idea of religious belief and faith is that there is no way to establish any sort of burden of proof in any direction at all. I can assure you that the atheists I know do not spend feverish hours of deep thought on proving the non-existence of God. Although there are, in my belief, some who have spent those hours who I can honestly say that I'm glad I read about it.

Posted by: (: Tom :) at August 18, 2005 09:22 PM

Realy good site!

Posted by: Donny at September 16, 2005 04:13 PM