What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • 10 Things Gay People Still Need

    Once the law changes and we have access to marriage, is that it? Will equality have been achieved? Will we suddenly have become full citizens? Will the job be done?

    Here’s my run down of what we still need.

    • We need it to be impossible for the authorities to accept a plea less than murder in a suspected homophobic killing where the defendants admit killing the deceased with a hammer in his own home. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24122514. I guess that means a review of hate crime legislation at least in Northern Ireland.
    • We need to be safe when we travel – that means building on the good work that this country has done in terms of foreign policy, but a review here wouldn’t do any harm either. Oh, and trade deals do need to be linked to human rights. (Yes, LGBT rights are human rights, where have you been?)
    • We need to keep working for marriage equality. We’re getting a step towards it – a massive step towards it, but it ain’t equality and equality is what we are after, right? Interesting question for the various gay rights organisations this – will they still work towards equal marriage once this legislation has gone though. They know this is a pragmatic compromise – will they keep up the fight? – and no, I’m not talking about mixed-sex civil partnerships.
    • We need an urgent comprehensive review of all religious exemptions from legislation.
    • We need better age appropriate sex education in schools.
    • We need access to education free from prejudice.
    • We need further work done by companies and institutions on supporting gay folk at work especially in order to develop access to leadership positions where LGBT people have not found these easy to access.
    • We need appropriate representation in the media.
    • We need the Archbishop of Canterbury to commit to supporting his senior gay clergy and work to undermine the systems which keep so many of them in lacy but impeccable closets.
    • We need Hollywood to understand that we don’t all end up dead or heartbroken – Brokeback Mountain, I’m talking about you.

    Have I missed anything?

    ,

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

  • Daily Service

    Don’t forget that St Mary’s choir is on the Daily Service on Monday morning. You have from now until then to work out how to tune in on 198 Long Wave.

  • What are these tardises?

    [Is tardises the correct plural of tardis?] Anyone know what the strange tardis-like aluminium things are that are appearing on the streets of Glasgow? There is one not far from here and another on St George’s Road. I keep expecting the Doctor to appear from one of them. Mind, I’ve never been a Dr Who…

  • What am I reading?

    Oh, thank you for asking to be sure. I’ve just finished re-reading Wise Blood by Flannery O’Conner, one of her two novels, each so devastating. I started it yesterday when my weekend began. So very dark. She captures faith based mauvaise foi so very precisely.

  • Delights

    Watching the cat doing her morning yoga Swimming in an otherwise empty pool The river at the Botanics An Icelandic Carol An “aha” moment causing someone’s face to melt so unexpectedly