How Like a Chevrolet a Bird Is! A recipe for Temple soup.

This recipe is so easy, anyone can follow it! No need to memorize nor even to write down the instructions! Certainly don’t attend a cooking school to learn how to prepare this—it will only confirm you in the error of your ways! And don’t bother worrying about quantities of ingredients—nay, even which ingredients to use! Such things as detail, careful measurement, and attention to processes, methods, and techniques are unimportant! So long as your final product is heartfelt, it will be as warming as chicken soup to the wondering soul.

  1. Start with an unusual theological idea, a revelation (i.e., an idea that was not arrived at on logical nor evidentiary grounds.):
  2. Then employ a blend of tactics so confusedly that they even mask the sleight of hand from the one attempting to utilize them.
    1. Make comparisons based only on the most general similarities.
    2. Take positive comparanda and generalize.
    3. Call generalized comparanda “evidence”.
    4. Assert conspiracy and corruption when puzzled interlocutors object.
      1. If possible, cite legitimately demonstrated cultural event as proof.
      2. When confronted with insurmountable evidence of difference, call this the result of corruption and conspiracy.
  3. Accuse naysayer of ignoring the evidence you have so clearly elucidated.
  4. Repeat steps as needed.
  5. Get so good at steps 1-4 that you now post and discuss this amazing evidence on a blog or, if you are well connected to one of the myriad niche publishers, in a non- or weakly peer-reviewed press.

Here is one example of such deliciousness:

Birds evolved from twentieth-century American automobiles, which tells us that winged creatures of the sky were formed right here in America, the Promised Land, God’s Own Country. You don’t believe me? Observe how like a Chevrolet a bird is! They both have very similar coloring in places, both are possessed of round black orbs, a bird has wings like a Chevy has doors, that can be extended or retracted depending on need, and both, most clearly and important, are capable of movement, sometimes at very high speeds. What does all this evidence mean? Of course that the maker of Chevrolet also made this poor little sparrow that had an unfortunate meeting with my kitchen window! What? You don’t believe me, you elitist sparrow-hater? Well, that’s because GM doesn’t want you to make the connection. Remember Enron? WorldCom? Lehman Brothers? AIG? Well, GM’s bailout is the result of the same process of lying and cover-up. What? So what if birds do their travel by air? This is one of the ways GM throws you off the trail! Still don’t believe me? You must hate America, modern prophets, and babies! Let me remind you, both birds and Chevys have colors! And they travel!…

See you all at my Costco book signing!

  • g.wesley

    … God’s Own Country.
    You don’t believe me?
    Observe how like a Chevrolet a bird is!
    They both have very similar coloring in places,
    both are possessed of round black orbs,
    a bird has wings like a Chevy has doors,
    that can be extended or retracted depending on need,
    and both, most clearly and important, are capable of movement, sometimes at very high speeds.

    was this intentional or do you naturally write in verse?

  • http://www.feastuponthewordblog.org BrianJ

    g wesley: that’s only further evidence of the truthfulness of the original post.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com Chris H.

    jupiterschild…I love you.

  • Mark Brown

    Don’t forget Bird Island.

    http://www.ldspromisedland.com/?p=220

  • SmallAxe

    g wesley: that’s only further evidence of the truthfulness of the original post.

    Only if it’s a chiasmus.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com TT

    A. You don’t believe me?
    B. Observe how like a Chevrolet a bird is!
    C. They both have very similar coloring in places,
    D. both are possessed of round black orbs,
    C’. a bird has wings like a Chevy has doors,
    B’. that can be extended or retracted depending on need,
    A’. and both, most clearly and important, are capable of movement, sometimes at very high speeds.

  • jupiterschild

    Announcing my new research organization:

    Foundation for Automobile Research and Mockingbird Studies.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com TT

    It will just be dismissed as Finch Promoting Rumors.

  • http://www.lifeongoldplates.com BHodges

    I like parodies especially when they make a good point. The FARMS acronym is clever but I fear (for lack of a better term) the possibility that this’ll simply turn into another FARMS bash. I’ve found plenty to value in research published through FARMS (or their new name, Neal A. Maxwell Institute). I realize this post is not particularly targeted that way, but wanted to throw a comment in with my .02. :)

  • http://www.lifeongoldplates.com BHodges

    full disclosure: i’ve also published in the farms review, and the summer seminar with terryl givens and richard bushman which i attended was hosted at the neal a. maxwell institute.

  • smb

    I don’t have much of a horse in this race, but this post seems mean-spirited to me.

  • g.wesley

    thanks for the link, mark (#4). never read that one before. too funny.

    “…summa cum fraude …”

    i could see this nibley as an fpr perma.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com Chris H.

    Well, he will be guest posting tomorrow. Stay tuned.

  • oudenos

    I think it a bit voyeuristic that some of you attempt to determine who chiasmed (smallaxe!!) and the steps taken to achieve chiasm (TT!!). I say if the author has reached the big X, an event consummated far more often in the fantasies of so-called intellectuals and parvenus than in real life, then we should properly act as though we weren’t privy to such details. But I am a bit old fashioned and would prefer to just enjoy poetry and not deconstruct everything down to base chiastica every time I scan a few lines. Call me a prude, but that is just how I was raised.

    Now then, back to reading Catallus in the time-testedfashion of the dignified: pre-critically with Victorian sensibilities!

  • jupiterschild

    @smb, bhodges, and anyone else:

    I appreciate the words of caution, and I want to clarify that this feeble attempt at parody was directed at no one in particular, and was not intended to be mean to anyone, though I certainly see how offense could be taken. I meant for this to be lighthearted and absurd. My apologies if this gave undue offense. I value the place of the Maxwell Institute and, for the most part, its objectives as well as the work of the majority of those associated therewith. I do think, however, that we should be able to jest. I, like most ancient authors, never intended the chiasm, and certainly not as a reference to FARMS.

  • mapman

    Oh, I though that this was supposed to be criticizing Rod Meldrum (FARMS/MI obviously doesn’t do things this way). TT, no offense but that chiasm really sucks compared to those in the Book of Mormon. Have you read this article?: http://byustudies.byu.edu/showTitle.aspx?title=8655

  • mapman

    I get the impression that this post is the second post on this blog in response to David Larsen’s post at the Millenial Star. If that is the case, you should know that David wasn’t trying to prove Mormonism right. He assumes that Joseph Smith was a prophet and that he did actually restore things, and so he assumes that there may be clues of there at one time being a temple endowment among the Israelites. His post was an overview of the things that he found interesting in his research and speculates are related to the endowment. I don’t see anything wrong with this approach if you already assume Joseph was a prophet who restored things and if you aren’t trying to prove it to other people.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com TT

    Madman,
    You may or may not be surprised to know that everyone from this blog who commented on David’s post and objected to his interpretations of the Bible also happen to “assume Joseph was a prophet.”. The assumption by many commenting on that thread, and in some ways perpetuated by David, that there is an inseparable relationship between JS’s status as a prophet and David’s interpretation of the Bible is not only offensive, but i think illustrative of the dangers that this type of interpretation can produce.

  • g.wesley

    haha, oudenos.

    a joke about a joke about a joke.

  • oudenos

    Thanks, g.wesley. The joke, though aimed more generally, was composed with you as the primary audience.

    The joy of chiasm is so great that many fondly recall and even publicly recount their first experience with it. Indeed some of these first hand accounts are situated in foreign lands, as though the exotic amplifies the thrill of the chiastic and the path to discovery is akin to unearthing buried treasure (when X does in fact mark the spot).

  • mapman

    I’m sorry, I was in a bad mood yesterday. I know that you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet. I apologize if I offended anyone. I think it is fine to challenge people’s interpretations of scriptures.

  • http://www.faithpromotingrumor.com TT

    no worries mapman!

  • http://www.heavenlyascents.com David Larsen

    Thanks, Mapman. I appreciate it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X