What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Predictions for 2014

    1. Remember those people who used to say, “But what is a blog…?” Well this year you are going to be hearing them say, “But what is a mooc…?”
    2. Gay men are going to start shaving again. Now that so many straight men have bought into the idea that beards are hip, it is time to mess with their fashion sense again. Consider this the memo. (Next year, the end of tattoos!)
    3. Church of Scotland General Assembly will be unable to affirm last year’s compromise on a local option for ministers who happen to be gay.
    4. More revelations relating to Cardinal Keith Patrick O’Brien.
    5. Number of active bloggers decreases. Influence of those still blogging increases.
    6. The real purpose of the Pilling Report will be revealed with hindsight as evangelicals begin to argue about its contents. (May take a couple of years, but trust me on this one). Initially this will be in private – increasingly in public. Having been the great unifying factor for Evangelicals for the last 10 years, attitudes to gay people will become the source of greatest disunity amongst Evangelicals for the next decade. Unappealing and unsatisfying as it is, Pilling is a watershed – it was never designed to court liberal opinion so we might as well stop moaning about it. It was designed to divide evangelical opinion and is going to be jolly successful.
    7. The Independence Referendum will be lost here in Scotland but alas, not by enough to shut everyone up.
    8. Such terrible statistics in the Diocese of Glasgow and Galloway that we lose at least 4 seats on General Synod.
    9. Lord Carey will say that Christians are being persecuted in the UK, that the church is dying out or that the sky is going to fall in, and will say it at the most unhelpful time possible – probably around one of the English General Synods or Easter.
    10. We will hear about our first UK gay divorce.

    Trends to watch

    • Continued meltdown of the Church of Scotland. Ceasing to be a national church before our very eyes.
    • Internet increasingly rewards those who know how to manipulate images.
    • Economic polarization of the UK continues.

7 responses to “Revised Commenting Policy”

  1. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    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?

    Reply
    1. Kelvin Avatar
      Kelvin

      Darren – thank you for your interest. However. the question is not whether you think this commenting policy quite stacks but whether I do.

      Reply
  2. John Sandeman Avatar
    John Sandeman

    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?

    Reply
    1. Kelvin Avatar
      Kelvin

      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.

      Reply
  3. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    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.

    Reply
    1. Darren Moore Avatar
      Darren Moore

      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”

      Reply
    2. Kelvin Avatar
      Kelvin

      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.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Random advice to someone newly ordained

    Treat everyone as though they are an adult. Especially children. When any hand is held out for communion, think WWJD? Don’t diss the Mothers’ Union You have been given the power to bind and loose. That means you have to say yes to everyone all the time, sometimes by saying no.

  • Guild of Servers

    To Hyndland yesterday to the annual festival of the Scottish Guild of Servers. Having previously chuntered to the guild office bearers about having the service in far-flung places (including our companion diocese of Argyll and The Isles, over the water), I decided that I had better turn up yesterday when it was just a couple…

  • Most commented

    Someone said to me that yesterday’s post looked like the most commented upon post on the blog. Not so, in fact. Most discussed posts so far have been: The Advent Candle Controversy – 47 comments and counting Two Literary Questions – 42 The Episcopal Brown Shoe Scandal – 33 Collecting things (the Collaborative Ministry thread)…

  • Liturgy should say what it means, and …

    The chiasmus that is so often quoted about liturgy these days is that liturgical writing should say what it means and mean what it says. By and large, I agree with that, though we do have to allow space for the times when we cannot grasp or explain all that God is. However, I have…