Degrees of divinity

Spot the link:
















Well, obviously one is the great redeemer and the other is the Son of God.

But which is which?

Here's the Mail on Sunday:

After weeks of biting his tongue, Boris Johnson celebrated his election as Mayor of London yesterday by finally giving vent to his feelings.
Shrugging off his minders – who had feared that one of his gaffes would derail his bid to topple Ken Livingstone – Mr Johnson relaxed with his first alcoholic drink in three months and launched a colourful attack on critics of his subdued campaigning style.
"I am just totally fed up with this artificial distinction...this sort of Arian controversy about the old Boris and the new," he said.
"There is no distinction."
His "Arian" remark apparently referred to an obscure theological dispute in the early church.

Got that, chaps, "Arian", not "Aryan".

Then Malcolm resorted to the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church to check it out:

Arianism maintained that the son of God was not eternal but created by the Father from nothing as an instrument for the creation of the world; and that therefore He was not God by nature, but a changeable creature. His dignity as Son of God having been bestowed upon Him by the Father on account of His foreseen abiding righteousness.

Now there's a load of analogies that stretch credence.

In passing, one Harry Phibbs (by name, by nature: who single-handed managed the abolition of the Federation of Conservative Students) is claiming ultimate parentage of the blond abortion ambition.

Of Phibbs it was once opined:

He is a very tall, posh boy (well probably not that young these days, late thirties). Harry Phibbs in person always gives the impression of being a cut-price/poor man's Boris Johnson. Same posh shamblingness, same surface cluelessness.

So ... that way with the rotting vegetables.

Sphere: Related Content