Here’s a video of a conversation I had with one of the members of St Mary’s last Sunday. Andy Winter was chatting to me about the way treatment and perception of HIV has changed over the years. We talked about new PrEP medicines, reducing stigma and the extraordinary news that the epidemic could be ended by 2030.
Take a look here:
I try to stick to the policy, whilst commenting on it.
Most of it pretty understandable/standard. But,
1.using Scripture as a weapon/quoting isolated verses. To a point I agree, but surely as well as the whole has to be understood as part of the whole, the whole is made us by parts. People misuse the Bible by taking a verse out of context, but they can easily be shown up. Otherwise we can’t use the Bible at all, other than saying – read all of it – there’s something that relates to what I’m saying.
2. How does the disclaimer square with not being able to comment on PSA? Is that a given (i.e. that it’s nonsense)? Are other opinions banned? Like Roman Catholic views. Even if (highly unlikely) it’s a minority view, are other historically minority views banned (charismatics, baptists) and non-Christians and all liberals – as there views are pretty minority.
3. Likening gay people to murderers. Unpleasant I agree. Although if (if I may quote a verse – but not to prove a point), this a reference to the 2nd 1/2 of Romans 1, the list includes people who disobey parents and the greedy. Presumably they’re still fair game?
Just not sure this quite stacks. It’s why people ask, “What are you afraid of?” when it comes to PSA?
Darren – thank you for your interest. However. the question is not whether you think this commenting policy quite stacks but whether I do.
Kelvin,
When reading about theories of the atonement, there is a real risk of continually reading things that have been said many times over – as you point out. But can I credit you with something reasonably original? “We’ve already established that like most Christian people I don’t believe in it.” I have never worked out how to determine the proportions of Christians who believe the various atonement theories. Is there some research out there?
Thanks John – I’m not aware of any research though I’d be interested in any there was. When I wrote that, I was thinking not simply of who believes what now but also of Christians through time. The history of these various ways of understanding the (or an) atonement is fairly well attested and it is clear that some have risen and fallen through time.
My presumption is that most of the people in the great blocks of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches (both now and through history) don’t believe in penal substitution – or at least, don’t believe it in the same way that a classical evangelical might believe in it as doctrine which must be personally accepted in order to lead to individual salvation. However, as you rightly point out, who believes what may not be so simple.
There are a few bits of research on this, but mostly from the context of PSA
E.g. Chapter 5 of “Pierced for our Transgressions”, by Jeffery, Ovey & Sach (IVP), which is a quite survey of theologians, east & west, a dozen of which are pre-reformation, starting with Justin Martyr.
Henri Blocher, “Biblical Metaphors of the atonement”, in the journal of the evangelical theological society, 47 (2004), pp629-645
“The divine substitution: The atonement in the Bible and history” by Shaw & Edwards (Day One).
I get the your blog, your rules. Just doesn’t sound like decent is welcome.
Bit of a PS,
Robert Letham’s, “Through Western eyes”
Looks at the differences & common ground with E-orthodoxy on lots of things, including salvation. Letham (Reformed), thinks there’s lots to get from the East re:-Trinity in worship, incarnational stuff, divination (rightly understood), but still holds that his “Reformed”
Well, Darren, I’ve found that there are quite a number of people who do want to meet and chat without the Atonement Thought Police stepping in to correct them all the time. In fact, though I expect you’ll be surprised to hear it, to those who don’t believe that particular doctrine, comments rather like your own can appear to be quite aggressive and verging on bullying.
So, you may not feel welcome to behave exactly as you like here. You are not. And there’s a comminity of folk who like it that way.
I wonder what is the first thought that comes into your head when you open an invitation and find yourself invited to a wedding. Do you say a wee prayer of thanksgiving for the couple? Maybe you do. Do you rejoice that two people have discovered that they love one another and give thanks for…
Just back from the Consecration of the new Bishop of Brechin in Dundee. Brechin may be one of the smaller dioceses in the Scottish Episcopal church but they like their pomp. Where else would the clergy procession have begun in the Council Chamber and made its way to the Cathedral accompanied by flying thurible and…
Off to Brechin for the consecration of the Diocese of Brechin’s new bishop. Will report later. The Diocese of Brechin was famously referred to by one of its former bishops as The Flagship Diocese of the Scottish Episcopal Church. Which only makes one wonder about the most appropriate sobriquets for the other six, doesn’t it?
Leave a Reply