And the Insanity Keeps Right On Coming…
February 12th, 2008 by tempe
I ran across this blasphemous product while checking on primary returns at the Fox News website.
SINGAPORE — A cosmetics line that extolled the virtues of “Looking Good for Jesus” has been pulled from stores in Singapore after a number of complaints from shoppers, according to media reports Tuesday.
Promising to “Redeem your reputation and more,” the product line included a “virtuous vanilla”-flavored lip balm and a “Get Tight with Christ” hand and body cream, The Straits Times said.
Wing Tai Retail, which manages the British retailer Topshop, removed the line late last month after receiving complaints.
“These products trivialize Jesus Christ and Christianity,” it quoted Nick Chui, 27, one of the complainants, as saying. “There are also sexual innuendoes in the messages and the way Jesus is portrayed in these products.”
One product has packaging with the image of Jesus wearing a bright white robe as he looks toward the heavens, while a heavily made-up blonde woman with an arm draped across his shoulder gazes dreamily at his face.
“Why would anyone use religious figures to promote vanity products? It’s very disrespectful and distasteful,” the report quoted 24-year-old accountant Grace Ong, as saying.
An unnamed Wing Tai Retail spokesman apologized to anyone who was offended.
Of course, we can contrast this with the following:
I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.
That’s from 1 Timothy 2:9-10. Do Christians today still read 1 Timothy 2? I suppose they do if they can squeeze it in between reading Daniel, Revelation, and The Purpose Driven Life.
Here’s the link for the story. There’s even a picture of what they think Jesus looked like (doubtful, considering this and this). This may be banned in Singapore, but I wouldn’t be shocked to find it wind in American Christian bookstores, which make a habit of selling Christian schlock.
Then again, maybe I’m just cranky today.
Well don’t you know that 1 Timothy was written by Pseudo-Paul and therefore has no authority?
Believe it or not, Benjamin, there is a prof at Erskine who doubts the Pauline authorship of the Pastorals. Needless to say, he’s somewhat friendly to feminist interpretations of Scripture. He’s also a Baptist, oddly enough (I only say that because I expect better out of Baptists, except for maybe Jimmy Carter). I decided to take my NT courses from another prof.
Interestingly, 1 Peter says some of the same things in 1 Peter 3. Of course, I guess you’d have folks say that it was written by a Pseudo-Peter. Funny how that works.
Maybe Pseudo-Peter was really Paul and Pseudo-Paul was really Peter. Great, now I’ve got a dissertation topic!
Sounds like a great topic for Yale or Duke Divinity School.