Day: 24 April 2007

I’ve just found a rather nifty plugin for WordPress. It basically inserts an “on this day…” item at the bottom of my posts (on each post page, not on the main page – if you’re looking at the main page, you’ll need to click on the title of the post before you can see it). Incidentally, I found it through Simon’s Blog – I saw it there, thought “that looks cool!” and downloaded it 🙂

Oh, the fun… anyway, that’s all from me for today. Three posts in one day, it must be some kind of record in recent times!

I’ve just read a great article by the Bishop of Durham, Dr N T Wright. It’s a response to Jeffry John’s Easter message, and also “Pierced for Our Transgressions” (a book which I mentioned recently – still haven’t started to read though). I think the response to Jeffry John is excellent. His is quite critical of “Pierced for Our Transgressions”, without having read the book I think he raises some good points. You’ll have to read the article to find out what they are though!

One thing I did want to mention was a quote he gives at the end of his response to Jeffry John:

God is love, say [some], and therefore he does not require a propitiation. God is love, say the Apostles, and therefore he provides a propitiation. Which of these doctrines appeals best to the conscience? Which of them gives reality, and contents, and substance, to the love of God? Is it not the apostolic doctrine? Does not the other cut out and cast away that very thing which made the soul of God’s love to Paul and John? . . . Nobody has any right to borrow the words ‘God is love’ from an apostle, and then to put them in circulation after carefully emptying them of their apostolic import. . . . But this is what they do who appeal to love against propitiation. To take the condemnation out of the Cross is to take the nerve out of the Gospel . . . Its whole virtue, its consistency with God’s character, its aptness to man’s need, its real dimensions as a revelation of love, depend ultimately on this, that mercy comes to us in it through judgment.

James Denney, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Expositor’s Bible, Hodder, 1894, p. 221f.

I really like that quotation, and in fact I think it sums up the idea of ‘penal substitution’ (as it were).

I’ll post up my own thoughts on ‘Pierced for Our Transgressions’ when I’ve read it – it’s quite a weighty tome though, so it might be a while…

Just a quick update about the past few days! At the weekend, we went up to Leeds for a wedding. One of Philippa’s friends from Cambridge was getting married, so we went up to the ceremony (which was in Leeds Cathedral – it’s very nice!), and afterwards to the reception at East Riddlesden Hall. Despite not really knowing anybody there, we had a good time – despite being rather tired from having to start quite early!

We travelled back again on Sunday, and got back home in good time. We did a few things related to the house-buying process in the afternoon (filling out the form the surveyors wanted, etc). In the evening we watched this week’s “Doctor Who” while having dinner — we really enjoyed this week’s one! I think it was probably the best one of the series so far…

Afterwards we watched ‘Lost in Translation’. It was a rather strange film. It was quite enjoyable, quite surreal, and I think made some interesting points… but the conclusion wasn’t very satisfying! Quite thought-provoking, in a strange kind of way!

And, I think that’s just about it for the time being. All for now…