Thanks Dave.  I have only read books by Francis Schaeffer (a long time ago!) and have not heard him speak publically so cannot comment on his 'addressing a corporate persona or an abstraction'.

However, I agree with you on the dangers of theological or philosophical argument becoming a game.  This can happen when we stop listening to the other and simply wait till he or she has stopped talking so that we can then dominate with our, oh so clever, reasoning and claims.  Like a game, it becomes a matter of scoring points.  And this is one of the tendencies amongst Christian apologists that Nick Baines seems to be addressing.

It's salutary to contrast this game-playing with the way Jesus hears people out, questions them so that they need to respond, has the common touch of story-telling in his use of parables and knows when to speak and when to be silent.

Roger,

The criticism implied in Nick Baines's remarks could be aimed at if not Francis Schaefer, his more zealous or less able followers. The reason I say this is that I thought Schaefer talked about showing people the inadequacy of their own presuppositions. Everything I have read about Francis Schaefer indicates that when he was dealing with an individual, he met the whole person in the way Nick Baines suggests. In public speaking however he was addressing a corporate persona or an abstraction.

I am puzzled about when presenting a theological of philosophical argument  becomes a a game. i worry when apologists use arguments I cannot accept and think they cannot believe.

Thank you John for your reference across to Nick Baines' excellent latest posting on his blog.  I prefer his dialogic approach to the media and, more generally, in his Christian apologetic, to the more defensive tone of 'poor us in the UK, we are not understood and our Faith is sneered at or ignored, etc'.  The latter may, at times, be true but we need a more positive, hope-giving attitude towards our fellow human beings.

Baines' statement, 'interlocutors are people with histories, contexts and contingent lives: they are not projects upon whom we work our philosophical or theological games' is refreshing and reminds me of the emphasis given by Francis Schaeffer in one of his books which I found helpful in engaging with others back in the early 1970s.  There Schaeffer urged the Christian reader to take seriously the presuppositional basis of the other's beliefs and disbeliefs and to give those presuppositions a good hearing.  Baines helpfully makes a similar point, encouraging us to be aware and seek to understand the personal histories and narrative contexts of other people's lives.  It is the bid for the mutuality and symmetry of conversation rather than the one-sidedness of declarations that do not listen.  As Bonhoeffer put it (I may not have the quote exactly right), 'we are to listen with the ears of God before we speak the words of God'.

Thankyou nerson,

I have read Nick Baines Blog...hmm I am sure i would be terrified of him,if his persona is reflective of his writing.

I understand his point which very much reflected my own sentiment, of the persecution of afghanis, iraqis and other nations, does put our own persecution as christians in this country in the shade. However i feel he refuses to aknowledge that if as christians we are denied the right to worship where we want and how we want, that is the beginnings of the erosion of religious freedom.

Should we preach at others everywhere? of course not, should we have the freedom to share? of course we should. Should we be allowed to have positive discrimination because we are christians or we are gay or black , no i dont think so, equality yes, positive discrimination no.

I live in a bilingual country where the home language is shamelessly promoted above english, in order to preserve the language, so if your not bi-lingual in some instances employment and worship would be impossible.Do i feel persecuted , no, i respect it. I am not able to be fluent in it i know how to get round it, i am not lazy just dont have the time to solely learn it with no distractions or memory problems. As Nick Baines says some people continually stick their head above the parapit, they certainly do not have an easy existence and lack the peace and contentment that their faith could afford them. I want to believe that religious integration of different faiths working alongside each other is possible, for there are so many cross cultural marriages and families and children of. Identity and roots are important as a history, but where we are in Christ now is far more important. If people grow believing people hate them just because they are themselves, either by religion or status or race, where does that leave you? it leaves you with no hope and no reason for living a disharmonious life.

Unlike Nick Baines i believe that some Christians in This country are indeed persecuted, but oh so ever so nicely.  Sometimes the persecution happens by christians to christians so much so as to deem a person unable to function.

But all that aside i may or may not contribute again before christmas and the new year.  So if i dont answer i will not have ignored you just missed your post.

In Peace.

Waterangel

In my Greek-English Interlinear Luke 12:51-53 reads

'Think ye that peace I came to give in the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For there will be from now five in one house having been divided, three against two and two against three will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against the mother, mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law of her and daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law'

Is this the right translation? What does it mean?

Phil Almond

Nersen, your latest was not one of your better posts, with its quotation of a very one-sided selection of texts, mostly misunderstood. Luke 12:51 is NOT a purpose clause in the original!

Can I recommend you to read Nick Baines' (Bp of Croydon) most recent post on his blog? He has pertinent things to say and hings you should consider. Read the comments too. URL is http://nickbaines.wordpress.com/

John Marshall

hi waterangel ..... perhaps we go wrong when we expect peace with all people  ..... not likely (inside or outside the church) if we follow the one who spoke the words of Luke 12:51 ..... the same one spoke of wolves dressing as sheep and deceiving people ....with the aim that we divide from such people, not accomodate them.  It is a fiction that we follow one who accepted all and every view -  he would have had a much easier life and death if he had done so -  his words speak for themselves  (I cannot imagine him in decades of negotiations with false teachers....)

Nerson Hi

I wanted to clarify with you, that I was not making a political statement of political correctness, or wanting to appear to support anarchosyndicalism. But the very use of the word anarchosyndicalism, sort of highlights a part of the problem.

Most Christians would not have even heard that word, and would have probably just thought of anarchy and certainly would not have related it to a statement about the labour party.

My statement was not about political behaviour but church behaviour. The Church which has a number of members with no political persuasion at all, but are not anarchistic in their views.

Tolerance begins with having a strong sense of value and faith within a particular belief system, but does not either need or insist that everyone has to believe the same. I wa simply trying to highlight that if as Christians we stick our head above the parapit we have to be beyond reproach. Not perfect but beyond reproach. I am not and there aint a shovel big enough for the dirt, but I know and i understand, the church is not either. It is not the contradiction of the gospel message, but the contradiction of the deliverers.

The issue of legal and moral law are often confused. I am not ashamed to Call Jesus My Lord . It is not illegal or immoral. To support our church in creating division between men and women and people of different faiths might be immoral though especially if its your own family.

Waterangel

Dave, I agree with you.  Annie Lennox's carol CD is well worth hearing, not least her own song, 'Universal Child', which has a moving and powerful lyric that resonates well with the Christmas story.

fern -  I would have hoped that other registrars could have done those tiny no of cases which went against the conscience of one of their colleagues..... there is no need for a PC 'thought-cleansing', is there?    Similarly, a doctor has been taken off an adoption panel (i.e. fired)...merely for asking not to be involved with a tiny no of applicants.  Others could have taken those cases and that doctor could have carried on her good work with ~99% of applicants - but not if the agenda is the removal of freedom of conscience and speech from the public square....    On Monday, a couple who own a B&B will be in court....  I was pleased to hear Evan Davis on Radio 4 saying he would simply go to a B&B where there was no issue..... a liberal postion  -  unfortunately, PC agendas are not very liberal in reality and want to censor and exclude opposing view points  (although there are groups in Britain that they do not take on!  Clue: the B&B owner is not called Mr Ali...)

We see a similar pattern of political machination in the CofE.  First, we get the call for space and tolerance for revisionist views despite the majority view being clear.  In due course, that call for tolerance becomes condemnation of the existing majority view as 'nasty' or 'backward'... nobody wants those labels (the CofE is approaching that phase and a few evangelicals have made themselves more acceptable by liberalising their views).  The last phase is intolerance of the original majority view so that only people who bow to the revisoinist programme can get jobs / promoted  (maybe except for a few token traditionalists for the sake of appearances, as long as they cannot actually affect anything...maybe that is where TECusa is and perhaps that is part of the reason so very few Americans go along on a Sunday...narrow appeal). 

A call for tolerance wrapped in intolerance is what we see in some UK court cases ...and in the CofE.  Clever politically when majority votes cannot be won.....silence the majority for fear of being labelled 'nasty'.....only tolerate what a pc elite say is tolerable.  People leave because it is all so depressing and takes so much time....slowly, organisations can be taken over.  Classic 'anarchosyndicalism;......

nersen, you write "Perhaps before commenting on Lord Carey et al, we should consider what we are doing to help those who are facing loss of jobs etc because they will not compromise on certain things...... of course, those who will compromise might not have any sympathy for them (even free speech and freedom of conscience do not always seem to be a right granted to all...)"

but is it really that simple?  I've always been baffled by the christian Registrar who objected to carrying out civil partnerships for gay couples but, presumably, had no problem marrying divorcees.  And what if she did object to that on the grounds of conscience - should her employers permit her to avoid such ceremonies?  Is there not a point when individuals have to recognise that if they genuinely feel unable to carry out the duties inherent in their work on the grounds of conscience, they should seek other work rather than play the martyr?  And would you happily defend a nurse of another faith who spoke of her beliefs while on medical visits to private homes?

I agree with dave on this posting. I felt that the song in itself needed to be a little more upbeat, it is a nice song for people who already believe but maybe needs a more repetitive lyric for new comers. It seemed a little gentle to me.

Also I am not ashamed to be a christian but i am ashamed of some of the antics of the church and some of the leaders. I am ashamed that people are dying to preserve my right to worship and i am ashamed that christianity in itself can presented the wrong way, and be seen as negative. Though we know the overall message is "Jesus saves," but sometimes the way it is presented, none of us would fit the job description of christian; and it could never be achieved. I am ashamed that some who profess to be christians present a picture of intolerance to people who do not make their vision, of what they believe the grade is, which to be a follower of Jesus or leader of Jesus followers have to be.

I am ashamed at the way the church treat the elderly and the lonely and the marginalised, I am ashamed that "the church" in some instances creates marginalisation, lonliness and isolation.

But I am not ashamed to promote Jesus to anyone. I do not believe that people are ashamed to acknowledge Christ they are afraid of the representatives of Christ and other faith leaders.

But The group of clergy promoting this are dedicated followers of Christ and are perhaps are rightly concerned that with all the choices and blurring of the edges of religion, that Christianity by its very nature of non indoctination may get sidelined. I believe that as christians we need to be more tolerant of our own different ways of worshipping before we can attempt to deal with other issues. The issues over homosexuality and women have catergorically proved that we have not yet done that. In other words we need to get our own house in order first.

My fear is that this will be viewed as divisive and intolerant. But it would be great to have a song about peace at Christmas, showing different religions working together, whilst holding on to their own faith.

Waterangel