As Ruth Gledhill among others reports, 138 Muslim leaders are calling for peace between Christians and Muslims, but are also warning that if there is no peace
The “survival of the world” is at stake.
How should Christians react to this call? The issue is not a simple one because the Muslim leaders are calling for this peace to be based around “the common essentials of our two religions”. Continue reading
Ruth Gledhill of The Times (London) has published the full text of an interview with the controversial gay bishop of the Episcopal Church of the USA, Gene Robinson. The interview is in fact by Andrew Collier from Scotland, and is the basis of an article in The Scotsman which John Richardson calls “Quite possibly the most stupid piece of journalism yet about Gene Robinson”. John’s comment is justified because of editorial gems like
Yet millions of Christians the world over are convinced – absolutely assured – that this man is the Antichrist.
Well, if anyone really thought that, their assurance might be dented if they actually read what the man has to say about himself.
I thank Dave of The Cartoon Blog (which is often more serious than one might imagine) for this story relating to the Church of England diocese of Chelmsford, to which both of us are in some way attached – that is, we are both Anglicans living and worshipping within it. It seems that the Bishop of Chelmsford refused to ordain an ordination candidate, Richard Wood, because this candidate refused to take communion from him. I was actually at the service on 1st July where Richard was to have been ordained, supporting another candidate; Richard’s name was on the service sheet, and the service went ahead without him, with no explanation given.
I posted earlier about Reuben and Andrew’s initial reactions from New Zealand to the book Pierced for Our Transgressions
Since then Andrew has posted seven times in response to this book: his first impressions; on the word hilasterion; on penal substitution in the early church; on a comparison with the Ransom from Satan model; and on the views of the atonement of Gregory Nazianzus, Athanasius, and Anselm and Aquinas – all these in just three days! He has certainly been busy, and is justifying his blog name Theo Geek. All very worthwhile background material, showing how one-sided is the evidence presented in the book.
And now his flatmate Reuben, a generally much less prolific blogger at Notions Incognito, has posted the first part of his full review of Pierced for Our Transgressions
I look forward to the forthcoming second part of this review.
Andrew and Reuben are certainly getting value for money out of their shared copy of the book!
Andrew from New Zealand reports his flatmate Reuben’s reactions to the book Pierced for Our Transgressions
My last post on Adrian’s apostasy was not to be taken seriously. But this one is. Apostasy is not quite the right word. But what is the right word for someone who pronounces a public curse on his brothers and sisters in Christ for disagreeing with him on a theological issue?
In fact I rather appreciated most of Adrian’s interview with the authors of Pierced for Our Transgressions
Bishop Pete Broadbent, Chairman of Spring Harvest, who commented on this blog a few days ago, has had more to say about the split between Spring Harvest and UCCF in this discussion forum, where he goes by the name “pete173” – two posts on the first page, one on the third, several short ones on the fourth.
In a comment philosopher Jeremy Pierce challenges my claim about people who condemn Steve Chalke, that
they show their confusion when, in blog comment after blog comment, they simultaneously accuse Chalke of describing a straw man caricature of PSA and condemn him for rejecting PSA.
Jeremy writes:
Your dilemma seems to me to be a false one: …
I haven’t read the blog posts you’re talking about, but here’s what I suspect they’re saying (because it’s what I’d say). They’re saying is the following. He has described a caricature of penal substitution to tear down, and then he has ascribed that view to all who accept penal substitution by simply calling that view penal substitution …
Therefore, he has set up a straw man and torn it down.
Here I want to defend my claim and demonstrate that it is rational and correct.
Continue reading
Adrian Warnock has posted his definition of penal substitutionary atonement (PSA), and also the definition in the book Pierced for Our Transgressions
This post is not really about the visual difference between the Maltese Cross (left) and the shape with a longer lower part, the Latin Cross (right), which is more standard at least in western churches. I could argue that equal-armed crosses like the Maltese Cross are originally pagan, and that only unequal ones like the Latin version are truly Christian. But that is not my point here. Nor is this at all about the modern country of Malta or its inhabitants. But I am using the difference in cross shape as a symbol of a difference between two fundamental theological outlooks which affects the theology of the cross and the atonement.