<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments for Jon Rogers</title> <atom:link href="http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:13:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>Comment on Jesus had twelve &#8220;bros&#8221; &#8211; so what? by Simon Martin</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/02/jesus-had-twelve-bros-so-what/comment-page-1/#comment-954</link> <dc:creator>Simon Martin</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:13:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=1013#comment-954</guid> <description>Thanks for your thoughtful reflections, Jon.I don&#039;t want to steal any thunder from you (or others) but, to a certain extent, what goes around comes around. I recall rehearsing almost identical points &amp; arguments 10-15 years ago with (a) friends in ministry in the UK, and (b) US colleagues in our mission organisation in Africa. At that point both Dick France &amp; Gordon Fee were &#039;on hand&#039; to give some useful exegetical weight to arguments.The ground of the debate has moved on (and Mark Driscoll rushes in wjere even John Piper fears to tread!), but the substantive arguments haven&#039;t changed.I have always thought that the biblical narative cheerfully and frequently turned itself on its head by the inclusion of counter-examples, exceptions and plain story. It is almost as if God is saying, &quot;Guys, you cannot be so foolish as to think that I&#039;m simply maintaining the staus quo, can you?&quot; This happens from the very start where the creation account(s) undermine the received ANE narratives of Enuma Elish &amp; En-Lil, all the way up to the end of Revelation where there are some significant disavowals of &quot;traditional&quot; Jewish apocalyptic.In a word God both undermines &amp; trumps culture.
Simon</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your thoughtful reflections, Jon.I don&#8217;t want to steal any thunder from you (or others) but, to a certain extent, what goes around comes around. I recall rehearsing almost identical points &amp; arguments 10-15 years ago with (a) friends in ministry in the UK, and (b) US colleagues in our mission organisation in Africa. At that point both Dick France &amp; Gordon Fee were &#8216;on hand&#8217; to give some useful exegetical weight to arguments.The ground of the debate has moved on (and Mark Driscoll rushes in wjere even John Piper fears to tread!), but the substantive arguments haven&#8217;t changed.I have always thought that the biblical narative cheerfully and frequently turned itself on its head by the inclusion of counter-examples, exceptions and plain story. It is almost as if God is saying, &#8220;Guys, you cannot be so foolish as to think that I&#8217;m simply maintaining the staus quo, can you?&#8221; This happens from the very start where the creation account(s) undermine the received ANE narratives of Enuma Elish &amp; En-Lil, all the way up to the end of Revelation where there are some significant disavowals of &#8220;traditional&#8221; Jewish apocalyptic.In a word God both undermines &amp; trumps culture.<br
/> Simon</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on Review: Evangelism in the Inventive Age by Doug Pagitt by Simon Martin</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/02/review-evangelism-in-the-inventive-age-by-doug-pagitt/comment-page-1/#comment-953</link> <dc:creator>Simon Martin</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:29:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=983#comment-953</guid> <description>Yes ... I&#039;m definitely going to get it!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes &#8230; I&#8217;m definitely going to get it!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on A Year in Essays: Wisdom, Semester 1 by Jon Rogers &#187; A Year in Essays: Semester 1 Overview</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/a-year-in-essays-wisdom-semester-1/comment-page-1/#comment-952</link> <dc:creator>Jon Rogers &#187; A Year in Essays: Semester 1 Overview</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:16:48 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=960#comment-952</guid> <description>[...] don&#8217;t get too fed up of academic writing! As I write the posts, I will link to them from here.Wisdom (in the Old Testament)Apologetics (in the postmodern era)Mark (the Temple and the fig tree) Permalink [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] don&#8217;t get too fed up of academic writing! As I write the posts, I will link to them from here.Wisdom (in the Old Testament)Apologetics (in the postmodern era)Mark (the Temple and the fig tree) Permalink [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on A Year in Essays: Wisdom, Semester 1 by Jon Rogers</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/a-year-in-essays-wisdom-semester-1/comment-page-1/#comment-950</link> <dc:creator>Jon Rogers</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:59:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=960#comment-950</guid> <description>Thanks for the encouragement! I found the link between appreciating the God of creation and the wisdom books (and Psalms) very interesting, one that I would have found fascinating to explore - but word counts and titles are out of my control! Ecclesiastes in particular, and parts of Job really do resonate strongly with postmodern ideas about the limits to knowledge and the questioning of purpose and meaning that is endemic in these doubt-filled years of economic uncertainty. I think we forget that for most of the people who lived in &#039;biblical times&#039;, life was at least as tough and hard to understand as it is for us at the worst of times, maybe even more difficult. Questioning is, I feel, a vital part of faith, not the opposite to it - not that you&#039;d think it listening to some Christians and Atheists! Appreciating that even the greatest human brain cannot possible take everything in, learning not to fear uncertainty but to worship is at the heart of postmodern faith. You might find some more insights on this in the essay I&#039;m putting up on Monday!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the encouragement! I found the link between appreciating the God of creation and the wisdom books (and Psalms) very interesting, one that I would have found fascinating to explore &#8211; but word counts and titles are out of my control! Ecclesiastes in particular, and parts of Job really do resonate strongly with postmodern ideas about the limits to knowledge and the questioning of purpose and meaning that is endemic in these doubt-filled years of economic uncertainty. I think we forget that for most of the people who lived in &#8216;biblical times&#8217;, life was at least as tough and hard to understand as it is for us at the worst of times, maybe even more difficult. Questioning is, I feel, a vital part of faith, not the opposite to it &#8211; not that you&#8217;d think it listening to some Christians and Atheists! Appreciating that even the greatest human brain cannot possible take everything in, learning not to fear uncertainty but to worship is at the heart of postmodern faith. You might find some more insights on this in the essay I&#8217;m putting up on Monday!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on A Year in Essays: Wisdom, Semester 1 by Alan Cartwright</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/a-year-in-essays-wisdom-semester-1/comment-page-1/#comment-949</link> <dc:creator>Alan Cartwright</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:14:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=960#comment-949</guid> <description>Thanks for your effort and generosity in making these essays available Jon. I really enjoyed reading that. I&#039;d be interested to see how the view of wisdom in the Pentateuch and through the OT as a whole would look if one lessened the idea of redaction - I for one regard the JEDP theory as the over-translation of literary boundary markers, and I would not regard the role of &#039;final redactors&#039; with quite so much weight. (I&#039;m still more conservative than scholar!) I imagine if anything it would make your conclusions stronger, with the consistent themes of wisdom showing even more clearly across authors and generations.
The real highlight to my mind that makes this so much more than just an interesting read was the penultimate paragraph. Have you come across &quot;Who Made God?&quot; by Edgar Andrews? He takes the premise of God as his starting point and evaluates his own world view and that of modern science, philosophy and society by it. I wonder if you could make the ideas in that paragraph more prominent somehow, as they would certainly have encouraged me to read the essay, and I hope it will inspire me to use wisdom far more in general ministry. It lifts the thoughts and themes of the essay far above an academic work to something with vast potential in ministry and evangelism.
(You&#039;ve at least convinced me to definitely take next years wisdom module at WEST!)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your effort and generosity in making these essays available Jon. I really enjoyed reading that. I&#8217;d be interested to see how the view of wisdom in the Pentateuch and through the OT as a whole would look if one lessened the idea of redaction &#8211; I for one regard the JEDP theory as the over-translation of literary boundary markers, and I would not regard the role of &#8216;final redactors&#8217; with quite so much weight. (I&#8217;m still more conservative than scholar!) I imagine if anything it would make your conclusions stronger, with the consistent themes of wisdom showing even more clearly across authors and generations.</p><p>The real highlight to my mind that makes this so much more than just an interesting read was the penultimate paragraph. Have you come across &#8220;Who Made God?&#8221; by Edgar Andrews? He takes the premise of God as his starting point and evaluates his own world view and that of modern science, philosophy and society by it. I wonder if you could make the ideas in that paragraph more prominent somehow, as they would certainly have encouraged me to read the essay, and I hope it will inspire me to use wisdom far more in general ministry. It lifts the thoughts and themes of the essay far above an academic work to something with vast potential in ministry and evangelism.<br
/> (You&#8217;ve at least convinced me to definitely take next years wisdom module at WEST!)</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on A Year in Essays: Wisdom, Semester 1 by Simon Martin</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/a-year-in-essays-wisdom-semester-1/comment-page-1/#comment-948</link> <dc:creator>Simon Martin</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:06:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=960#comment-948</guid> <description>Thanks for this, Jon. I&#039;ve donwloaded and will read at leisure.
Simon</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for this, Jon. I&#8217;ve donwloaded and will read at leisure.<br
/> Simon</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on Does God Change, Does God Feel? by Alan Cartwright</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/does-god-change-does-god-feel/comment-page-1/#comment-947</link> <dc:creator>Alan Cartwright</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:11:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=942#comment-947</guid> <description>These are indeed the problems when we try and define anything about God. I share that reservation and I&#039;d say it&#039;s exactly why this is so hard. God&#039;s emotions cannot be fundamentally different to ours, but it doesn&#039;t seem possible that they can be entirely the same. I wonder if it as simple as concluding that because of this, change cannot be part of the definition of emotion, only an aspect of how we experience it.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are indeed the problems when we try and define anything about God. I share that reservation and I&#8217;d say it&#8217;s exactly why this is so hard. God&#8217;s emotions cannot be fundamentally different to ours, but it doesn&#8217;t seem possible that they can be entirely the same. I wonder if it as simple as concluding that because of this, change cannot be part of the definition of emotion, only an aspect of how we experience it.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on A Year in Essays: Semester 1 Overview by Simon Martin</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/a-year-in-essays-semester-1-overview/comment-page-1/#comment-946</link> <dc:creator>Simon Martin</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:49:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=953#comment-946</guid> <description>And eventually the dissertation, too, I hope, Jon?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And eventually the dissertation, too, I hope, Jon?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on Does God Change, Does God Feel? by Gareth Irvine</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/does-god-change-does-god-feel/comment-page-1/#comment-945</link> <dc:creator>Gareth Irvine</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:35:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=942#comment-945</guid> <description>So i asked my lecturers about that one, to which he replied &quot;Ah, well now you&#039;re on to something there, that&#039;s a very interesting question!&quot; to which I&#039;ve never really had the time to think any more about.
If yes, then you&#039;re into Open Theism, where the future is to a degree up for grabs, but sounds bit unorthodox perhaps?
If no, then does human activity have any meaningful impact on the eternal trajectory of creation if God&#039;s identity is inextricably tied up through covenant with us?
Hmmm...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So i asked my lecturers about that one, to which he replied &#8220;Ah, well now you&#8217;re on to something there, that&#8217;s a very interesting question!&#8221; to which I&#8217;ve never really had the time to think any more about.<br
/> If yes, then you&#8217;re into Open Theism, where the future is to a degree up for grabs, but sounds bit unorthodox perhaps?<br
/> If no, then does human activity have any meaningful impact on the eternal trajectory of creation if God&#8217;s identity is inextricably tied up through covenant with us?<br
/> Hmmm&#8230;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>Comment on Does God Change, Does God Feel? by Mark Lambert</title><link>http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/2012/01/does-god-change-does-god-feel/comment-page-1/#comment-944</link> <dc:creator>Mark Lambert</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:08:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonrogers.co.uk/?p=942#comment-944</guid> <description>You&#039;re definitely right about Scripture Jon, the very essence of Israel means &quot;struggles with God&quot; (Genesis 32:28) and I often think about my own journey in the context of this passage in Scripture. I can&#039;t help but feel God likes someone who will argue with Him. Take Abraham&#039;s argument with God over the fate of Sodom &amp; Gomorrah. Scripture scholars and have written a lot about this passage. Some call it the first instance of intercessory prayer. Some suggest the point is to demonstrate that God always acts justly. Some point out that the purpose of the dialogue was not to change God’s mind but to help Abraham grow in his understanding of God.
Now I believe God&#039;s providence is absolutely unchangeable in every way. Since God is the Cause of things through His intellect (together with His will), and since it must be that the exemplar of every one of His effects pre-exists in Him, it is necessary that the exemplar of the order of things to their end pre-exist in the divine mind. This exemplar of things ordered to their end is, properly speaking, providence. Thus everything, insofar as it is, is immediately subject to God&#039;s providence. This, of course, includes all free human acts performed by human beings. Also, since God&#039;s providence is one with the divine essence, which is absolutely unchangeable in every respect, it follows that God&#039;s providence must itself be unchangeable in every respect.The will is an active principle which is not determined to one thing, but rather has an indifference towards many things, God moves it in such a way that it is not determined of necessity to one thing, but such that its motion remains contingent and not necessary, except in those things to which it is moved naturally. In other words, divine providence is so
all-comprehensive that it not only extends to those things that come about in the created order, but also to the way or the mode in which they come about. Thus, as regards our human acts, not only the acts themselves, but also the very freedom with which they are done is included under the all-comprehensive scope of God&#039;s unchangeable providence. How mysterious and wonderful this truly is.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re definitely right about Scripture Jon, the very essence of Israel means &#8220;struggles with God&#8221; (Genesis 32:28) and I often think about my own journey in the context of this passage in Scripture. I can&#8217;t help but feel God likes someone who will argue with Him. Take Abraham&#8217;s argument with God over the fate of Sodom &amp; Gomorrah. Scripture scholars and have written a lot about this passage. Some call it the first instance of intercessory prayer. Some suggest the point is to demonstrate that God always acts justly. Some point out that the purpose of the dialogue was not to change God’s mind but to help Abraham grow in his understanding of God.</p><p>Now I believe God&#8217;s providence is absolutely unchangeable in every way. Since God is the Cause of things through His intellect (together with His will), and since it must be that the exemplar of every one of His effects pre-exists in Him, it is necessary that the exemplar of the order of things to their end pre-exist in the divine mind. This exemplar of things ordered to their end is, properly speaking, providence. Thus everything, insofar as it is, is immediately subject to God&#8217;s providence. This, of course, includes all free human acts performed by human beings. Also, since God&#8217;s providence is one with the divine essence, which is absolutely unchangeable in every respect, it follows that God&#8217;s providence must itself be unchangeable in every respect.The will is an active principle which is not determined to one thing, but rather has an indifference towards many things, God moves it in such a way that it is not determined of necessity to one thing, but such that its motion remains contingent and not necessary, except in those things to which it is moved naturally. In other words, divine providence is so<br
/> all-comprehensive that it not only extends to those things that come about in the created order, but also to the way or the mode in which they come about. Thus, as regards our human acts, not only the acts themselves, but also the very freedom with which they are done is included under the all-comprehensive scope of God&#8217;s unchangeable providence. How mysterious and wonderful this truly is.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
