OST is closed for business but its spirit survives on my blog.

Global warming, storm warnings, and the future of the church

James Lovelock argues in The Vanishing Face of Gaia - to be published in the UK on 26th February - that the earth is suffering from a terrible and probably incurable sickness caused by human industrial and agricultural activity, that the various therapeutic technologies and practices currently being developed offer at best an illusory hope of saving the planet and at worst are likely to exacerbate the problem, and that politicians should abandon the effort to avert the crisis and instead set their minds to the challenge of living with the devastating consequences of climate change. Indeed, 'living' may barely be an option: 'I am not a willing Cassandra,' he writes, 'and in the past have been publicly sceptical about doom stories, but this time we do have to take seriously the possibility that global heating may all but eliminate people from the Earth.'

Metavista: review and response

Metavista: Bible, Church and Mission in an Age of Imagination by Colin Greene and Martin Robinson is a bold attempt to stimulate ‘a movement for creative and radical cultural engagement, informed by a biblical imagination’ (from the Metavista website). I reviewed the book back in September. Colin Greene has now published a lengthy response, which I have been given permission to reproduce on andrewperriman.com.

Crossways - Journeyings into the Emergent with Open Source Theology

In late 2007, Andrew published a book called ‘Otherways - in Search of an Emerging Theology’, which consists of OST posts (his own) between 2002 and 2007. ‘Crossways’ is a half-reference to Andrew’s publication, also providing a selection of OST posts: from 2005, when I first encountered the site, to late 2007, and a vague subtext which dialogues mildly with ‘Otherways’, just to provide a postmodern frisson for literary types. Up to 12 different contributors are included, permission to do so having been solicited and granted, but instead of trying to provide a cross-section of views, I have shamelessly weighted the contributions towards my own. But you will get a feel of the site, the conversations, and the plots, machinations and shifting alliances which (to me) give the enterprise its dramatic interest.

Contours of Pauline Theology - Tom Holland

This study of the pervasive influence of the Passover on Pauline thinking and the corporate significance of the NT texts was first published in 2004. Dr Tom Holland of the Wales Evangelical School of Theology has not been backward in wanting to draw attention to his work. There is a website devoted to it, with an online version of the book (appallingly badly proof-read, and presenting the work in an earlier form from its modified published version), and a collection of many reviews of the book. The book itself is also available, hardback, at an astonishingly inexpensive price for a work of academic scholarship, and I obtained a copy, new, through Amazon for £10.47.

Canaanite Genocide and its Monstrous Concept of God

I just read with interest and horror your attempt to sanitize the biblical account of the Conquest of Canaan under the rubric of "new creation." So what’s the difference in God’s supposed project of cleansing the land so that the Israelites could occupy it free from idolatrous Canaanite practice and the Hutu’s attempt to cleanse their land of the elitist Tutsi `cockroaches?’ Or Hitler’s grand dream of ridding the world of the corrupting virus of Jewish vermin so that the Arian super-race might ascend to its heights?

Son of Man is a title? (2)

Can we come at this from a slightly different angle? A more literary or canonical one, perhaps? Maybe it won’t help, but just writing it is helping me get it straight in my head, so here goes… I know some contributors will be out of sympathy with this, but rereading this thread it does feel like a bit of a re-run of the debates about early?/high?/Christology and the ‘historical Jesus’ vs ‘Jesus of the Gospels’ discussion that has been banging around for 20 (150?) years.

New look

Open Source Theology has been given a new look, partly just to freshen things up, partly in an attempt to use space better. Of course, the task should have been outsourced to a competent web design agency at an exorbitant cost and then tested on suitable focus groups, but it wasn’t. So there may be a few things wrong with it. It’s difficult to check it on all browsers on all operating systems. Let me know.

What would Jesus do to the planet?

I followed a trail from Kurt’s user biography here on Open Source Theology to his blog to some reflections by John MacArthur on the ultimate futility of environmentalist activism:

The environmental movement is consumed with trying to preserve the planet forever. But we know that isn’t in God’s plan.

The earth we inhabit is not a permanent planet. It is, frankly, a disposable planet - it is going to have a very short life. It’s been around six thousand years or so - that’s all - and it may last a few thousand more. And then the Lord is going to destroy it.

I’ve told environmentalists that if they think humanity is wrecking the planet, wait until they see what Jesus does to it. Peter says God is going to literally turn it in on itself in an atomic implosion so that the whole universe goes out of existence (2 Peter 3:7-13).

Daniel Dennett on The Purpose Driven LIfe

In a quite remarkable video clip the philosopher Daniel Dennett discusses Rick Warren's highly successful book The Purpose Driven Life. Dennett is at pains to praise the book for bringing purpose and meaning to countless lives, but he is unhappy about a number of statements that touch upon questions of evolution and design. I agree with much of the tenor of his argument - I think that the church has to listen to rational criticism and has to find a way to speak reasonably about itself and its defining story. In fact, Rick Warren does a pretty good job at this TED conference of speaking reasonably about himself and his 'success'.

Splitting hairs

Nick Carter has just added a comment to an old article called Jesus, God and narrative theology. He asks about how we deal with the apparent tension between a narrative theology - at least as I described it in that post - and the need to establish and defend doctrinal formulations:

Your first point leaves me with one question: If narrative theology dissuades “reductive and rationalizing theological schema” while allowing “a diversity of perspectives without having to arbitrate between them” Then…

Is that to say that there is never a need to arbitrate between theologies? That hairs never deserve to be split? That doctrines such as the nature of Christ are so unimportant that we should not only seek unity but establish a framework for our doctrine that forbids any debate?

There seem to be an awful lot of refuting false teachers and false doctrines in the epistles, and nobody told any stories to do it.

Syndicate content