Did the Church of England cross the line in York? – Christian Today

1 thought on “Did the Church of England cross the line in York? – Christian Today”

1. A few points:

   Mark is right about Augustine’s mistaken exegesis. He is wrong about his view of Genesis: Ephesians 5: 18-33, together with 1 Corinthians 11:3-16, Genesis 2, 1 Timothy 2:8-15 and 1 Timothy 3 establish the fact that male headship is a feature of ‘very good’ humanity before the Fall – contra Ian Paul, Tom Wright et al (unless of course they have changed their minds)..

   It is right in principle to scrutinise our exegesis in the light of modern knowledge and modern experience. But we must be open to the possibility that our exegesis might be right and modern knowledge and experience wrong. For instance, prompted by modern astronomical knowledge to understand Psalm 19:5-6 as a description of the sun’s observed circuit of the sky rather than a proof text for the geocentric system is not an artificial adjustment. On the other hand I presently see no satisfactory way in which the theory of evolution (or any view in which animal predation predates the appearance and fall of man) and a wholly trustworthy Bible can be reconciled (contra Jim Packer and Gerald Bray – unless of course they have changed their minds): besides animal predation the issues are: no place in the generally accepted understanding of life on earth for the radical discontinuity which is necessitated by Romans 8, and the switch from literal to metaphorical in Exodus 21:8-11(on the theistic evolution view) – it is God who spoke these words (21:1).

   Most difficult of all: modern views of same-sex attraction cannot be squared with a wholly trustworthy Bible. And – the bread which God offers to gay and transgender people is the same bread which he offers to all who will embrace his sincerely offered great salvation through the blood and resurrection of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit. That salvation starts with who we are as we enter the world. Whatever our family wealth or poverty, whatever our mental, physical, genetic disability or lack of such, whatever favourability or unfavourability of our family or social circumstances, whatever our sexual inclinations or problems, we all have one fundamental thing in common: we are all faced with the wrath and condemnation of God from birth onwards and we are all born with a nature inclined to evil. Those who by God’s grace obey his effectual calling to embrace his offered salvation (and those who, lacking the ability to consciously respond, are made by God beneficiaries of that great salvation) enter on a process, punctuated by events, which is completed, in Warfield’s words, ‘in its full effects only when at the Judgment Day they stand, sanctified souls, clothed in glorified bodies, before the throne of God, meet for the inheritance of the saints in light’. The buffetings, sorrows, blessings, agonies of mortification, struggles, refinings, chastenings we are called upon to endure in that narrow way that leads to life, and the blindspots we have, vary enormously from one person to another. Ah, the blindspots. Every evangelical knows about John 3:16 – the gospel in a nutshell. But what about 1 John 3:16? I seem to recall that Juan Carlos Ortiz, in his book ‘Disciple’ reckoned that 1 John 3:16 is not in the gospel according to evangelicals. I have to ask myself: have I tried, really tried, tried to the point of agony, to lay down my life for the brethren: tried to the point of agony to resist the inborn inclination to disobey the command to be content with food and clothing and give the money saved to those in need?

   Phil Almond

   Log in to Reply