What is in Kelvin's Head?

Last year’s predictions – how did I do (2017)

30/12/2017

Let’s take a quick look at how well I did at predicting 2017

1 – Trump will become President of the USA later this month but won’t manage to survive for 4 years. (And don’t be rejoicing anyone, take a look at his VP).

Well, Trump did but we won’t know yet whether he will survive.

2 – No significant progressive change will be proposed by the bishops of the Church of England in relation to LGBT issues.

I think I was right about this one too. Some might say that there are signs of hope in the C of E but I’m a glass half empty person when it comes to that part of the Communion.

3 – A solid majority in all houses of the Scottish Episcopal Church synod in favour of opening marriage to same-sex couples. (But I’m not predicting whether or not it will be enough to pass the legislation).

Yes – I was right about this too. Right to be cautious about whether it would be enough to pass the 2/3rds supermajority in each house. It did but only by one vote in the House of Clergy.

4 – SNP to lead the next administration of Glasgow City Council after the elections in May but possibly in coalition with others.

Basically got this one right too – not a coalition but a minority administration all the same.

5 – Lib Dems will claim they’ve turned the corner after the local elections. Greens will continue to make very little progress in a political situation that seems almost designed for them to thrive. UKIP will do badly in Scotland. And is there another party?

Lib dems claimed they had turned the corner (but hadn’t). Greens continues to make very little progress. UKIP did badly.

6 – #Brexit will be triggered. And we will all end up the poorer for it. Especially those already poorer.

It was and yes, we are poorer.

7 – Success for the TIE campaign – I expect that they will make significant progress in getting more inclusive education in Scotland’s schools. By the end of the year I expect there will have been progress either in new Scottish Government guidelines or proposed legislation.

The TIE campaign has had a successful year though we’ve not got new guidelines or proposed legislation yet. The heat is going to have to be applied to the SNP if it is going to happen.

8 – Wikileaks-esque publication of details of membership of a large pornographic internet site and consequent sackings, suicides and divorces. (It is only a matter of time).

There was such a leak. I’m surprised there have not been more.

9 – François Fillon to win the French Presidency but Le Pen to do frighteningly well.

Half wrong, half right. No Fillon but yes, Le Pen did frighteningly well

10 – The end of the beard. (Oh, I know I’ve predicted this before but how long can this hirsute tyranny go on? How much longer can good looking men keep their faces covered. Come along boys, enough is enough. Lather up.)

Alas and alack. Not yet.

Overall result – not bad this year.

2017, predictions

7 responses to “Have you no scriptural basis though?”

Jackson

15/02/2012

Hello,
If this blog were a talk radio show, I would say something like â€˜long time listener, first time callerâ€™. I found this article very interesting and the role of the Bible in the 21st century is something that many people are hesitant to enter meaningful discussion about. Being brought up in an Evangelical tradition I was taught to hold the Bible in very high regard. However Iâ€™ve come to realise in recent years that Scripture, Tradition and Reason is the only tenable way to approach oneâ€™s faith. Old teachings do run deep, though, and the question needs to be asked, when is it appropriate to look to the scriptures as a source of authority? The flagrant abuse of the Bible to further dogmatic agendas is undoubtedly a source of frustration to many Christians, but what do we do when reason seems to lead to a stalemate? A prime example will be when Margot MacDonald eventually revives her End of Life Assistance Bill. Many Christians in Scotland will be lobbying against and undoubtedly no small number for. Now scripture and tradition would affirm the sanctity of life, but that wonâ€™t stop quite a few people allowing their opinions to be moulded seemingly by reason alone. Meanwhile there will be a great many caught in the middle of very persuasive arguments, struggling to make up their minds while desperately looking for something authoritative to cut through the confusion. Are we too scared of fundamentalism to look to the Bible for guidance in such scenarios?
Cheers!

Reply
Neil Oliver

15/02/2012

Kelvin, I’m fascinated by your blog posts this week and encouranged that your statements make such sense to me and my view of my faith and the world. Great stuff.

Reply
Helen

16/02/2012

I too have followed your blog this week with interest and have found that it has encouraged my broadening faith, stimulated by St Mary’s. Thanks for the effort and thought you have applied. Dont be too hard on Evangelicals though.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  16/02/2012
  
  Being an Evangelical taught me so much of what I know…
  
  Reply
Akma » On Miracles

17/02/2012

[…] that the BIble holds a primary place of reference for Christian life (and I acknowledge that my boss doesnâ€™t*, in the sense I propose here), one ought to have something to say about the prminence of […]

Reply
Brother David

21/02/2012

Being an Anglican educated in a United Methodist seminary, my stool has four pegs; scripture, tradition, reason, and experience, the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.

I have enjoyed these fireside chats good Padre.

Reply
Melissa Holloway

28/02/2012

This reminds me of a funny conversation I had with my 20 yr old son – we found ourselves discussing whether or not Kelvin was an evangelical?!!

He had taken a university course on Evangelicalism in America and I suspect it was taught by a (perhaps undercover) evangelical. Seems that one of the ideas that my son came away with was that being evangelical was more a way of doing things – an idea that we did indeed hear from Kelvin – that one has the good news and is eager for the world to know.

Of course my argument was that evangelicals do have to believe certain things, that I remember realizing I wasn’t an evangelical anymore when I couldn’t believe that there was a certain group of people, however they were defined, for whom hell was reserved. I feel there are parts of the movement that are just not benign.

But anyways, it is remarkable that someone somehow trying to put evangelicalism in the best light caused him to conclude that Kelvin fit the bill.

I think in the end we came up with the conclusion that Kelvin is able to hold a distinct theological vision in a perhaps evangelical way, having taken the best from his roots. I hope I won the day.

The whole conversation felt a little like the Twilight Zone.

Reply