Skip to content

About Glen

I'm a preacher in Eastbourne, married to Emma.

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

5. In its own context and on its own terms the OT must be understood as a dynamic multi-Personal revelation.  OT saints who failed to see this did not ‘partially understand' the revelation - they misunderstood it.

 See this post here, and my next two posts - 5 and 6.

.

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

6. The Angel of the LORD is the pre-incarnate Christ.  His identity as God from God is as clear in the OT as His incarnate identity is in the New.

.

.

...continue reading "Trinity, revelation and OT – 6"

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

7.  Psalm 45 is a good example of a Scripture that assumes a multi-Personal doctrine of God even in its own context.

.

.

...continue reading "Trinity, revelation and OT – 7"

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

8. The administration of Gentile inclusion is not a ‘model' of progressive revelation.  The administration of Gentile inclusion is the new thing.

.

.

...continue reading "Trinity, revelation and OT – 8"

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

9.  Calvin and Owen believed in divine simplicity.  (I have serious reservations about the doctrine - see here)  But they managed to avoid the more dangerous aspects of it because they insisted upon Christ-mediated revelation. 

Both of them refused to say ‘Because God is simple any revelation of any aspect of God's nature will reveal the Whole.'  The both were crystal clear that revelation must happen in Christ as eternal Mediator (and be appropriated knowingly in the Person of the Mediator).

See here for examples from them both.

.

You may know that I (sporadically but vigourously!) bang the drum for Christ the eternal Mediator being the deliberately revealed, consciously known object of faith in the Old Testament.  Here are some posts on the issue.

Pete Myers read it and posted this.  And our further discussions are here and here.

By way of some kind of response, here are ten propositions that circle around some of the issues. (Fabricius eat your heart out). 

For those yawning right now, hold on for some grand hilarity next week - I'm on holidays and will post only frivolity.  For those fixing to flex their theological muscles, remember to play nice.

.

10. The One is not more ultimate than the Three.  Neither is the immanent something different to what we see in the economic. 

.

.

...continue reading "Trinity, revelation and OT – 10"

Channel 4 screened the first of Make Me a Christian last night.  Haven't seen it yet.  But here's one reviewer's reaction:

The infuriating thing will be if some of the group think happier lives can only be achieved through Jesus, rather than, say, empathy and courtesy and not being fat / crying / shagging all the time.

btw I'll give you one guess which newspaper!

Anyway, here's the gist of their gripe: 'You Christians can have your Jesus, I'll stick with my empathy and courtesy.' 

First notice what diminished values they are.  Not love and sacrifice - empathy and courtesy.  (Reminds me of a parishioner telling me we need to preach more 'tolerance' from the pulpit. I told him we'd do no such thing.  We would preach what Jesus preached - to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.  How ridiculous is the virtue of 'tolerance'!)

But notice most of all the self-righteousness.  They haven't rejected Jesus in favour of license.  They've rejected Him in favour of law.  Their own law to be sure, but law nonetheless. 

Even the most 'lawless' can actually be seen seeking their own righteousness by their own power according to their own law.  Hitler was a non-smoking, vegetarian, tee-totaller. He had his own struggle with his own rules by which he would be righteous.

In this sense the vast majority of people are legalists.  Only the truly despairing, depressed and suicidal have actually given off the quest for a righteousness of their own.  And note too that such people have also given off their quest for freedom and happiness.  I'm just not sure that there is a category of licentious people who are not also legalists.  Am I wrong on this?

If not, what would this mean?  Well it should remove from us any desire to give people God's law as the proper guide for their self-righteous instincts!  The problem is not merely and not mainly that the law by which they are seeking to justify themselves is faulty.  To justify themselves by the right law is even worse!  The Jew who sought to justify themselves by God's law is not less but more culpable in His sight (Romans 2-3). 

The gospel must be the answer.  The gospel is not, 'Try doing things this way'.  The gospel is 'It is finished!'  Now that will humble.  That will drive the world down to contrition and brokenness because our real drive is not an abstract lawlessness but a craving to establish ourselves, justify ourselves, to make a name.  Jesus, in being our righteousness, strips us of our fig leaves of empathy and courtesy.  Our deepest social, ethical and environmental concerns are filthy rags.  He calls us to renounce this 'righteousness' and be clothed only in Him. 

That's far more offensive than telling people the right laws by which to self-justify.  I wonder which route the Channel 4 team will take?  I think I can guess.

.

UPDATE: Read Marcus' blog here or Daniel Blanche - seems like my fears are founded!

.

Check out this Bonhoeffer quote.  H/T Ben Myers

“It is wrong to assume that on the one hand there is a word, or a truth, and on the other hand there is a community existing as two separate entities, and that it would then be the task of the preacher to take this word, to manipulate and enliven it, in order to bring it within and apply it to the community. Rather, the Word moves along this path of its own accord. The preacher should and can do nothing more than be a servant of this movement inherent in the Word itself, and refrain from placing obstacles in its path.”

—Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship (Bonhoeffer Works Vol. 4; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), pp. 227-28.

Or as Barth would say (speaking of the Spirit), the Lord who speaks is the Lord who hears. 

Preachers are not bridge-builders bravely standing in the hermeneutical gap between then and now. (How much homiletics depends on exactly this assumption??)  The living word is indeed alive (not just capable of liveliness!).  The Spirit is at work making His word lively, relevant, applied or whatever other actions the modern preacher is encouraged to take into their own hands!

.

Had to chuckle at this from Jonny Long's Grace4Life webiste:

 

In case you can't quite make it out, it's

  • The Helmet of Pride
  • The Sword of the Tongue
  • The Shield of Defensiveness
  • The Belt of Self-Protection
  • The Breastplate of My Own Righteousness
  • The Shoes of Busyness

Which is your favourite?

Any to add?

.

Bobby writes here about the dangers inherent in confessionalism

I particularly liked this phrase:

I’m not saying that our various traditions and confessions aren’t important, but that “our” stake in those confessions is unimportant.

It's so true that we have a stake in our theological positions and Christian labels.  We find identity in the alignments we make within the body.

This is what can make Christian blogging so darned nasty at times!  Let's be honest - there's a lot of unChristian-ness on Christian blogs.  Why?  Well a lot of it is because we're not just discussing ideas out there.  We have a stake in our positions.  We justify ourselves through our theology.  We have bought into our tribe and our tribal identity.  We know where we stand in the world because we wear the colours...  And this bozo over here is flying a different flag.  And it's so hard to hear what they say because they're not dressed up as one of you.  It's easier simply to shout out "You're a blue tribe, I'm a red tribe."  But what has that achieved?  Only to re-inforce our party-spirit, to demonize and to distract our attention from the actual content of our Christian witness.  

Paul faced exactly this with the Corithians:

"I am of Paul"  "No, no, I am of Apollos" (1 Cor 3:4).

The "I" is very prominent here. We beat our chests and find strength in our parties.  

And Paul's answer? 

"You are Christ's!" (v23) "And in Him, Paul and Apollos are yours! (v22). 

When you understand you don't belong to Christian teachers or factions but to Christ, there's a tremendous liberation.  I'm not a "red tribe" man.  I belong to Jesus.  "The LORD is my banner" (Ex 17:15)

And free from the need to beat my tribal drum I can see Paul and Apollos and Cephas for who they are - just servants of Christ.  I don't belong to them, they belong to me.  Everything they say is mine in Christ.  All their good stuff doesn't belong to them, it belong to Christ and in Christ it's mine. 

We don't have a stake in our theological positions.  We belong only to Jesus.  Every other position belongs to us. 

21 So then, no more boasting about men! All things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future--all are yours, 23 and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.  (1 Cor 3:21-23)

 Here's a sermon of mine on exactly this point: 1 Corinthians 3

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer