• Politics Just Became More Interesting

    There’s a lot of soul searching going on in the UK over the European Election results. Here’s my take on it all…

    • Those complaining most about the low turnout need to think about what they want to do in order to stop low turnout. The best thing to do is to join a political party and work to get people to the ballot box to vote for what you believe in.
    • Trouble is, I don’t find a party I want to belong to.
    • The above 2 points are the problem.  (Or at least, they are my problem with politics at the moment).
    • The media coverage from the BBC seemed particularly biased. I don’t like criticising the Beeb because I love it but it really did seem to have become the UKIP Broadcasting Corperation and I still can’t quite fathom why.
    • I don’t think I know a single person who has told me they were supporting UKIP. Now – is that because I’m in a little bubble and I genuinely don’t know anyone who votes that way or is it because voting that way is not socially acceptable?
    • Nick Clegg made a number of strategic errors in taking on Nigel Farrage in TV debates. Firstly it got Farrage even more coverage and allowed him to appear to be an equal when he wasn’t. Secondly Clegg failed to merge the UKIP and Tory brand. (People like me wonder whether he is opposed to the Tories at all – he just doesn’t come across as disliking what they stand for and someone in his position needs to be able to convey something a little stronger than dislike). Thirdly, he didn’t really do it well enough – die-hard party members were impressed by him but that’s not what the exercise is all about. Keep it Simple is still effective. (One of the posts that I had up recently which got lots of traction was about why I’m supportive of the EU because of mobile phone roaming, oh yes, and because we don’t tend to go to war in Western Europe with one another as once we did).
    • Policywise I hope that political parties concentrate on those who didn’t vote rather than those who voted UKIP.
    • I fear they won’t.
    • I was surprised that the SNP did not increase their share of the vote.
    • I wasn’t surprised that the Lib Dem vote collapsed.
    • I feel for the Greens who were struggling to get a word in edgeways. I kind of wish that I could vote Green but the trouble is, they’ve got their policies.
    • The Liberal Democrats are not going to do better until they have a change in leader and until there is obvious contrition. It is going to get worse before it gets better.
    • I can’t speak for the rest of the country, but I can’t take the leadership of the Labour Party in Scotland seriously.
    • Thank God there was no “Christian” party on the ballot paper.
    • Politics just got more interesting because people don’t know what it all means and don’t know what comes next.
    • That’s the best politics in the world.

    You got your own take? Share it in the comments below.

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

  1. Jackson Avatar
    Jackson

    Hello,
    If this blog were a talk radio show, I would say something like ‘long time listener, first time caller’. 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 I’ve come to realise in recent years that Scripture, Tradition and Reason is the only tenable way to approach one’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 won’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!

  2. Neil Oliver Avatar
    Neil Oliver

    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.

  3. Helen Avatar
    Helen

    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.

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Being an Evangelical taught me so much of what I know…

  4. […] that the BIble holds a primary place of reference for Christian life (and I acknowledge that my boss doesn’t*, in the sense I propose here), one ought to have something to say about the prminence of […]

  5. Brother David Avatar
    Brother David

    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.

  6. Melissa Holloway Avatar
    Melissa Holloway

    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.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Four quick theatre reviews

    I’ve been out quite a lot recently. Here are some quick reviews. Sunset Song at the Kings, Glasgow – excellent production which could perhaps have been improved with surtitles. The Doric became no easier as the night went on. Although I enjoyed this, I left the theatre delighted that the National Theatre of Scotland was…

  • Sermon – 5 October 2008

    When I turned up the readings to look at to prepare to speak this morning, I found myself thinking about the last time I was thrown out of a religious institution. I was sent packing. Told to get out. Instructed not to return until I knew how to behave. What was this cruel institution, I…

  • Knitting Group online forum

    Right, here is the thing. I’ve set up an online forum for the new knitting group which seemed to be forming all over the place this morning. In the choir, in the pews, in the synod hall, amongst the servers. The talk of knitting was everywhere. Indeed, knitting was being committed during the choir rehearsal…