TEoD: Chapter 15: Good Angels

Back in class again, Murphy reflects on how much he loves teaching (so much that he avoids it whenever possible).

Word of mouth had made the class size increase every year.

I bet.  What was it Dean Archer Fallworth told us the students called the class?  “Jesus for Jocks.”  Murphy does know he’s teaching the easiest of the Easy A’s, right?

Speaking of Fallworth, Murphy again inwardly sneers at his article.

Anyone who published a paper on “Button Materials of the Eighteenth-Century Georgia Plantations” needed to get a life.

Seriously?  Get a life?  What are you, one of your very own Jocks for Jesus?  A life as a published academic and dean of faculty.  What a sucker that Fallworth is!

Btw, pal, when were you last published?  Methinks Indiana Murph over here doth protest too much.

Arriving in his lecture hall, Murphy jokes around with some students, who I’m sure laugh uproariously because they know this is a guy who grades entirely on emotion.  Speaking of, the mysterious blonde from last time comes to class again.  She’s not carrying a notebook or computer or anything, and every male in the class, including Murphy, is so blindsided by this gorgeous being that they can’t concentrate.  What was that about professionalism and needing a life, Murph?  Also, I thought you were in love with a redhead in Washington.  My, doesn’t take too much to turn this Christian’s head.

Murph provides a very basic PowerPoint slide on “Good Angels” in the Bible, with helpful tidbits about the blessed beings:

  • Angels do not get married to each other

  • There are a great number of angels

Wow, incredibly fascinating!  So much so, in fact, that the “striking blonde” ditches between slides.  Thus Murphy feels “the sting of disappointment” even though, not to belabor the point, but he is supposed to be in love with Isis.  In fact, as he warns the students about a quiz next week, his thoughts are still on her.  The blonde, not Isis.

Professional!

Advertisements

Posted on August 3, 2017, in The Edge of Darkness. Bookmark the permalink. 14 Comments.

  1. Back when I was in college, I don’t think I would’ve wanted to take a class like Murphy’s, even if it is an easy A. I went to college to learn things, not to take easy classes where you can get an A just by agreeing with the idiotic views of a terrible professor.

    • I took explicitly religious courses in college (since it was a Lutheran college and they were required), and even they didn’t delve into nonsense about angel population and mating habits as though angels were a demographic studied by sociologists.

  2. “And next time we’re going to be talking about Solomon’s wives. Wives. And 1 Kings 1.”

  3. You know, the fact that he felt that he had to title his slide ‘Good Angels’ implies that there is such a thing as ‘Bad Angels’. So what constitutes a ‘bad angel’? The immediate answer he would probably give are that demons are the ‘bad angels’, but that if that’s the case why does he still feel the need to specify that the angels he’s talking about are ‘good’ if the only bad ones out there all became demons? Why not just have the distinction be ‘angels’ and ‘demons’, which is what most people would be familiar with anyways? Or are the ‘bad angels’ the ones that do things like tell someone to sacrifice their son to God or spread plagues among God’s enemies? But if that’s the case, are they really ‘bad’ since they are following God’s orders like the good angels supposedly do? Wouldn’t that make them just as ‘good’ as the ones that follow the ‘nice’ orders God gives?

    So many questions raised over a slideshow Murphy probably made an hour before class started, none of which he probably has a good answer to. The only facts we can gather are that they do not share the qualities that ‘good angels’ have. So from this, we can conclude that bad angels are the ones who… marry each other.

    Huh. I mean, I know that supposedly angels and humans getting together is a bad thing, but I don’t see how marriage between two angels is a bad thing. Is it because they’re all supposed to be men? Because I thought angels technically had no gender.

    • Bad angels are the ones that make a man lust after women he doesn’t intend to marry? (‘Cos it’s all God’s plan and not in any way his fault, your honour.)

  4. Oh my dog, Murphy, what do the (lack of) mating habits of angels have to do with archaeology? You know, that subject that you’re supposed to be teaching about?!

    It bears repeating — Fallworth’s paper on button materials actually sounds pretty damn fascinating. You can learn a lot from old buttons — social class, trade/economics, local materials, fashion trends, and if you’re lucky, there are threads attached to those buttons that will give you even more information about its previous owner.

    • My thoughts exactly. His previous drivel was at least about Biblical things which could theoretically be the subject of archeological studies if they indeed existed and were found. (And the authors made sure they were found, although the studies performed amounted to “Look what I got, bitches!”) But Angels? Pretty sure the Bible doesn’t mention any of them dying on earth, so you’re not digging up any winged humanoid skeletons any time soon.

      Unless Murphy is going to dig up, from a thick mud layer, a perfectly preserved house with a double bed with holes at shoulder hight on one side of the matters, and a massively oversized baby crib. I’d actually like to see Murphy make an exhibition of the home where a human and angel lived with their Nephilim child, before the flood buried the home.

  5. Let’s see. Fallworth follows his interests and uses his skills to dig into details of obscure historical facts. Murphy recites Bible verses I learned in grade school and dances like a marionette controlled by Methuselah. But sure, Fallworth is the one who needs to get a life.

    • I just can’t get over how odd it is to tell a fellow academic to get a life based on the subject matter of his research. Surely Murphy has been around countless people who study a wide variety of obscure things. LaHaye created this college professor character, but it’s very clear that he hated higher education and had zero understanding of it, let alone of those who choose to make it their careers.

      • This actually sounds like a very common (and adolescent) attitude I’ve come across a lot, where my interests are cool, while your interests are boring and stupid except where they intersect with mine. Not everyone outgrows it, and in LaHaye’s case, it was no doubt exacerbated by his belief that his extensive knowledge of Bible trivia gave him the keys to the secrets of the universe.

  6. And according to 1 Corinthians 11, women should cover their hair because of the angels. Maybe the Bad Angels are the ones that fly around and poop on women’s heads.

  1. Pingback: Deconstruction Roundup for August 11th, 2017 | The Slacktiverse

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: