I was in conversation with Prof John Curtice about the General Election after the Sung Eucharist this morning.
We touched on what might happen at the election, how a UK government is actually formed, will proportional representation ever happen, will the SNP propose another referendum next year and what it is like being John Curtice in the middle of all this.
The conversation was recorded and is available here:
https://vimeo.com/124745987
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.
Now, just in case there is anyone reading this who comes to St Mary’s who hasn’t been around in previous years at Christmas – there’s a job to be done tomorrow that you might not know about and your help would be most appreciated. As a liturgical church we are vigilant about keeping Advent, a time of…
The Advent antiphons begin at this time. They are mystical phrases that are inserted into the liturgy of evening prayer before and after the Magnificat in the days leading up to Christmas. They each have their own plainsong – ethereal music that comes to us from somewhere deep inside the mystery of advent. In St…
Forgive me posting a video two days running. (I’m still quite snuffly, though am hoping to be capable of thought soon). This video is too good not to repost though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZrf0PbAGSk Thinking of a way of conveying the message that is just too good not to pass on. That’s the central challenge of Christian mission,…
I suspect that we don’t have enough acrobats in church these days. Take a look at this video from the Vatican showing us the way forward. I think that you’ll find that there is something for everyone in this video.
Leave a Reply