A relatively brief round-up. The bibliobloggy stuff is nearer the end. And the most intriguing link is last of all (how biblical!).
First up, finding any fresh perspective on Anglican troubles is unusual. So I was struck by this argument from Peter Carrell commenting (from more-or-less the inside) on the complexities of what evangelicalism means and how it relates to Anglicanism.
A rather different take on Anglicanism comes from the agnostic? / atheist? (I think) Heresiarch, responding to the Bishop of Reading’s rather odd comments (and somewhat misreported ones – see my own note) on C of E and M & S.
Broadening out a bit, David Keen drew my attention to a survey on the (largely non-existent) relationship between the church and the world of work. The whole survey is worth reading, though I think there must be questions about the sample. It would also be interesting to see a mix of denominational comparisons, as well as those across cultures.
Like me David Green is intrigued by the lyrics of Robbie Williams’ new single Bodies, and its apparently explicit references to the Cross. I’m not so sure if there is any coherent thought behind this song, or whether the ambiguities are accidental.
I don’t normally link to the same blog more than once in a round-up, but Heresy Corner did it again with a sharp needle puncturing the Dawkins balloon “Richard Dawkins increasingly resembles the later Frank Sinatra, free-wheeling it through the tunes that made him famous”
Next comes a twofer, as Daniel McClellan comments on Jim Linville’s posting of his brother’s throughts about scientists who believe in God.
Tyler Williams had a great reflection on the end of historiography and prophecy (which might be even more interesting if one follows the classifications of the Hebrew canon) complete with Life of Brian excerpt.
Matt continued his series of interviews by landing Richard Bauckham, who is always good value, and as interesting as ever. An awful lot of people don’t seem to know he’s killed form criticism!
Nick Knisely turns up a piece of genetic research on the descent of the priesthood from Aaron. As he summarises the research into DNA “The biblical account of one common ancestor for the judaic priesthood doesn’t seem to be valid. But it does appear that the priesthood does spring from a specific group of people at some point in Jewish history. And one particular individual was the common ancestor of a large number of modern day Cohens.”
Comments on this entry are closed.