I’d quite like to think these really were the political rules.
7 responses to “Revised Commenting Policy”
-
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.
-
Previous Posts
-
Tilly – RIP
The last couple of weeks have not been a good start to the year. In the middle of my illness last week it became apparent that Miss Tilly, who shared my life for the last 10 years, and my sister’s life for 6 years before that was considerably more unwell than I was. Last Tuesday…
-
Video Service: Conversion of St Paul
I was much struck whilst I was off sick of how difficult it is to find liturgy online that makes you feel you've joined in with something. Quite a few churches in the states broadcast their services online now but I didn't find I enjoyed them terribly much. It was all rather big and rather…
-
Back to work
I’m back to work and back to blogging today. Its been a difficult start to the new year being off work for 2 weeks and no doubt I need to pace myself as I get back to the fray. I’ll be starting to deal with the message mountain later today. If you are waiting for…
-
Health Update
Thank you to those who have been enquiring about my health. Here’s the current bulletin. I saw my doctor yesterday and we agreed that although I’m improved, I’m not recovered from the flu yet. I am ever more convinced that real flu (Not “man flu”, not “a bit fluey”, not “I had the flu yesterday”…

Leave a Reply