5) “Wiseguy”

Mike Post theme songs always have a bridge to them. Sometimes it works; sometimes it just seems arbitrary. Here, the bridge works perfectly. The main theme speaks of danger, while the bridge – during which our protagonist and the two men who often save his life are introduced – is a nicely heroic counterpoint.

4) “Doctor Who”

How can you not include this? I went for the classic version, not the arrangement from the current revival.

3) “The Equalizer”

By Stewart Copeland of The Police and Animal Logic. Completely sets the stage for the show.

2) “Hawaii Five-O”

A lot of people would put this at the top of the list, and justifiably so. And it’s very, very close.

1) “Perry Mason”

Evocative, instantly memorable. Perfect. I think it’s just a tiny bit more timeless than the Hawaii Five-O theme, although if you ask me tomorrow I might tell you just the opposite.

Vocal theme songs are a little different matter – they tend to be from comedies. I’m not going to try to rank these.

“It’s Garry Shandling’s Show”

Can you say “meta”?

“Mystery Science Theater 3000”

They had to change the lyrics every time the cast changed. This is the version from my personal favorite era of the show.

“Moonlighting”

Al Jarreau. ‘Nuff said.

“The Big Bang Theory”

By the Barenaked Ladies. I have the full version of this song on my MP3 playlist.

“Phineas and Ferb”

By Bowling For Soup, who – come to think of it – aren’t that different from Barenaked Ladies.

There you go. Have at it in the comments.

Yesterday, they gave me my birthday present, since they hadn’t been here for my birthday. They also mentioned wanting to go to Parnassus Books in Nashville today. My sister-in-law is an English professor, and they’d been reading about author Ann Patchett’s bookstore and had seen her appearance on “The Colbert Report” talking about the store. I’d been wanting to see the store myself, even though, as a Kindle user, I’ve gone over to what my brother  considers the Dark Side.

Dad had a funeral to take care of today at the funeral home where he works part-time.

So we drove to Nashville this morning, had a pleasant time at the bookstore, wandered around the Mall at Green Hills, then stopped at Toot’s South in Murfreesboro for lunch. Mike wanted to take the scenic route back to my Dad’s house. (That part should have raised a red flag, but I guess I’m a little dense.)

As we drove up to my father’s house, I noticed an extra car in the driveway. As we pulled in, I noticed several extra cars.

It was at that point I realized I had been had.

It was a surprise 50th birthday party. Dad did not have a funeral today after all, and the Parnassus trip – however enjoyable – had actually been for the purpose of getting me away from the house for a while so that he, Mrs. Rachel, my sister, my other brother and the rest of my nieces and nephews could set things up. The guests included my pastor and his wife, my Sunday School teacher and his wife and my former editor Mark McGee.

I have to admit, I did not suspect a thing. Not a blooming thing. It was a lovely party.

Jacob’s graduation, by the way, was a great time as well. You will remember that he was both an award-winning football star (who has a scholarship to play this fall at the University of North Alabama) and a basketball star. Neither of those things prevented him from being third in his class – and he missed being salutatorian by only the thinnest of margins. He spoke at the graduation as class president, and did a terrific job.

Tomorrow should be a nice morning as well. Dad pastored at Blankenship (which was then part of a three-point charge) for 16 years, starting around the time I was graduating from high school. When he was there for the opening of their beautiful new sanctuary earlier this year, he noted that they did not have a nice chair for the pastor. He and Mrs. Rachel decided to buy a chair in memory of Mom and of Mrs. Rachel’s late husband Clayton. The chair is finally in and ready to be dedicated.

By the way, when we were at my sister’s house after graduation last night in Linden, Mrs. Rachel pointed out the earrings and necklace she was wearing to my sister and me. They were, it turns out, a secret pal gift to her from my mother, back when Dad was pastor at Mt. Olivet and Mom and Mrs. Rachel were in the United Methodist Women together. It was a lovely moment of recognizing Mom’s presence even in the midst of her absence. She would have been very proud to have been sitting in the bleachers watching her grandson Jacob get his diploma, just as she was proud to see Jacey cross the stage two years ago.

They showed a very brief snippet of Johnny’s last TV appearance, which I recall as clearly as if it were yesterday.

Johnny, of course, is widely believed to have thought David Letterman, not Jay Leno, his ideal successor. What is certain is that he never appeared with Leno after retiring.

Anyway, a year or so after Letterman moved to CBS, he did a week of shows from Los Angeles. There was a running gag that week where Dave would introduce some hugely famous celebrity who was supposed to be bringing out the Top Ten list. Each night it would really be Calvert DeForest (a/k/a Larry “Bud” Melman), although the on-screen graphic would display “CLINT EASTWOOD” or “BARBRA STREISAND” or what have you. Calvert would claim to be that person, but obviously would make no effort to actually look, act or talk like that person.

This went on for four nights. On the fifth night, Friday, this happened:

The discussion revealed one of our challenges in living our lives as Christians. On the one hand, Christians, including United Methodists, believe the Bible to be critically important to our faith – one of the primary ways in which God’ will and way are revealed to us. John Wesley, the founder of the “Methodist” part of United Methodism, described what has come to be known as the Wesleyan Quadrilateral – scripture, tradition, reason and experience – as the ways in which our faith comes to us. But the Bible is critical to that process.

The trouble is, despite the chest-thumping done in some neighborhoods of Christianity, it only takes about 15 seconds of Bible reading before you realize that our application of the Bible to faith in the 21st Century is a challenge. Even if you summarily dismiss the whole of the Old Testament as inapplicable to the Christian church (you shouldn’t) there are parts of the New Testament that we perceive as being binding on all Christians and others that we perceive as applying only to the particular place and time in which those books were written or which they describe. The next time a fundamentalist tells you he believes in applying every sentence of the Bible, ask him if he and his fellow church members have sold all of their possessions so that they can be distributed to the poor, as described in the book of Acts.

The fact of the matter is, every denomination – in any nook or cranny of the Christian universe – has to judge and interpret exactly how to apply the scripture. The Bible is a complex book, filled with poetry, history, exhortation, teaching, and more. Some of the more horrific Old Testament stories of conquest and genocide seem completely out of character with a just and loving God, so responsible teachers have to explain that they are descriptive, not prescriptive – God didn’t necessarily endorse everything that was being done in God’s name in the books of Joshua or Judges, for example.

When Paul says that he doesn’t allow women to speak in church, what does that mean? Some denominations believe that’s a prescription for all time and that it therefore prohibits women in ordained ministries or, in some cases, even leadership positions of any kind. Others believe that Paul’s command was based on the specific situations he encountered in the specific churches where he ministered at a specific point in history. To apply it today, these other denominations say, would be wrong, especially when we see cases where God’s calling appears to have been placed mightily on specific women. I have to fall in that latter camp; I would not want to be in a church that would deny Aileen Massengale or Diana DeWitt or Cathie Liemenstoll the pulpit, to use three examples of United Methodist pastors who have inspired and influenced me. The Rev. Debra Snellen, who comes from a more charismatic tradition, is the co-founder and executive director of LEAMIS International Ministries, the group with which I’ve taken all my foreign mission trips. Do I believe she was called by God? I think you know the answer to that.

Biblical scholarship, of course, is a key resource in making these calls. What do we know about the society in which a particular book was written? In what context would the original readers have taken it? Are there nuances of language or culture which might cause us to misinterpret what a passage really means? Are there aspects to our modern culture that cause us to misinterpret or miss the point of what was going on when the words were being written?

Bible scholars can assist us with some of those questions. But we have to make sure that scholarship is honest. There’s a tendency sometimes to find what we want to find – to use Bible scholarship to conveniently ignore or deprecate passages we find inconvenient. We have to make sure that we’re listening to what the Bible says, not telling it to say what we want it to say. Jesus did not promise the church a cozy relationship with popular culture; quite the contrary. Sometimes, in our effort to make the church “relevant,” we overlook that.

The best Bible scholarship illuminates God’s word; the worst is an attempt to shield ourselves from the light of that word.

However, even the best Bible scholarship may not be able to get us all the way to God’s will. There are still situations where we aren’t sure how to interpret Bible passages and where the other three legs of Wesley’s quadrilateral – tradition, reason and experience – have to guide us.

In all things, of course, we’re to seek wisdom, and humility, and love. I believe there are right and wrong answers, but I know myself well enough not to think that I have all of the right ones on file. That requires that I treat those with whom I disagree with love and respect, even in cases where it’s important to speak out or take a stand.

“Good Eats,” which recently wrapped production after 14 seasons, was one of the most inventive things ever seen on American television – funny, informative, and accessible. It was good for food, it was good for science, and it was just plain fun to watch. The show was, as far as I can tell, your own creation.

I knew that all good things must come to an end, and even though I was sorry to see “Good Eats” go, I looked forward eagerly to whatever your next project would be. I knew that you could do other formats. Your miniseries “Feasting on Asphalt” and “Feasting on Waves” were travelogues that, while different from “Good Eats,” were just as good.

You may still be planning something great. I hope so. But it worries me that you seem to be ramping up your participation in Food Network’s competitive cooking shows.

I will admit it – I was a fan of the original, Japanese “Iron Chef,” and I loved the first few seasons of “Iron Chef America.” They were goofy fun, and you were a perfect choice for “Iron Chef America,” bringing your wit and knowledge to a play-by-play role.

But food competition shows have become redundant, repetitive, and overblown. They’re part of the reason I rarely watch Food Network anymore, having sought refuge in Cooking Channel, which is what Food Network used to be. (It even airs “Good Eats” reruns.) And in a crowded marketplace of food competition, the only way to stand out is to try to hype and overhype the soap-opera, professional-wrestling aspects of the competition. I felt like “The Next Iron Chef” was a waste of your talents, and now you’re barging headlong into the long-standing “Food Network Star” (formerly known as “The Next Food Network Star”) franchise.

Alton, I realize you have to earn a living, but this crap is beneath you. It’s so far beneath you it’s not even funny. The promos refer to you, Bobby Flay and Giada DeLaurentis as “food icons.” Well, you didn’t become a food icon by hosting crappy “reality” shows, and if crappy “reality” shows are the future of your career, you won’t be a food icon for long.

Please figure out some way to move in another direction. We’re not waiting for the next Food Network star, prancing around the kitchen spouting Guy Fieri-style catch phrases. We’re waiting for the next “Good Eats” or “Feasting on Asphalt.”

Please, I beg you, move on – even if it means switching networks.