I think there are 2 routes the C of E can go from here I) is the, ‘everyone is a child of God’, sociological route including the complete spectrum of individual identities (aka radical inclusion) or 2) only ‘ those who believe in the name of Jesus have the right to be called children of God’, one body under Christ the head, the church, the bride of Christ, as represented by marriage, male and female, 2 becoming 1. There is no middle way that unites these 2 groups, they are distinctly separate ideologies/theologies and need to be structurally differentiated if… Read more »
Where does the Bible say that everyone is a child of God? Scripture surely says that we are created by God – not the same thing at all, although it does say that we are created in the image and likeness of God. Yet it also tells us that we are dust, and unto dust shall we return. Jesus alone is Son of God. We become children of God by adoption and grace, born again of water and the Holy Spirit. There are two expressions often used in Christian circles that have no Scriptural foundation that I can find. One… Read more »
I wasn’t thinking directly of authorities, only stating my personal opinion. But actually I have always thought that the presentation in Acts 17:28 of Paul as quoting Aratus of Soli (Phaenomena 5) ‘we are indeed his children’ gives validation to this sentiment as authentically Christian
Thank you ”openmind” and Martin Hughes. Paul was of course arguing against the worship of graven images, and using a quotation from a pagan poet to make his point. Had someone asked him what exactly he meant by ”we being the people/offspring (genos) of God” (Acts 17. 29a), I suppose he would have referred to our being created in the image and likeness of God, and perhaps he would have continued to say that we see that image and likeness undefiled by sin in Christ. To be conformed to Him is to be restored to that likeness. As for the… Read more »
There is no evidence that the ‘father’ referred to in Lalachi 2.10 is Abraham. Rather, the author appears to be drawing on the tradition spelled out in Deuteronomy 32.6:
‘Do you thus repay Yahweh,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is not he your father who created you,
who made you and established you?’
I don’t think your remarks affect what I said about this phrase’s being validated in the Bible for Christian use. Aratus’ sentiment is endorsed.
i think Malachi’s parallelism does conceive of God as father of all Israelites, since a mere patriarch would not take precedence of God in a formal utterance. He is not embracing humanity in general but if Christians are to receive this text they must believe that it is more widely true than the prophet may have perceived. Mind you he was aware that God’s name is great among the Gentiles
If you follow up Paul’s quotation from Aratus, you will see that it refers to the Greek pagan god Zeus. I am no classicist, but I believe that Zeus was known by the pagans as ”father of gods and men”. Not that they believed that he was literally their ancestor, but because he was a kind of super-patriarchal figure. Paul would have regarded Zeus and his cult with disgust, and patriarchal figures are hardly popular in the Church today. It must also be said that the translation ”offspring” is only one possible translation of the word ”genos”. It can mean… Read more »
This whole debate reminds me of C.S. Lewis’ discussion of the use of the word ‘Christian’ (I think it’s in one of the 3 volumes of his Collected Letters), where he talks to a new convert about her confusion over when she ‘became a Christian’. I’m quoting from memory, but he gave the example of a young man who joins the army. The day he joins, he’s a soldier, but then his trainers come and tell him, ‘We’re going to make a soldier of you.’ Hmm! Thus in one sense I ‘became a Christian’ when I was baptized at two… Read more »
It’s a typical Hellenistic hymn to the supreme God, known as Zeus, yes. They are not generally idolatrous in the sense of attributing divine qualities to ‘an image’. There is no expression of disgust but of approval, the audience being asked to recognise the implications of what one of their own poets has said. If Paul had really rejected the sentiment he would have been deceiving his hearers. I’m as entitled to use the phrase as he is.
Yes, but the author does not say ‘Have we not all one Father? Has not one God chosen us?’ but ‘has not one God created us?’ See also the tradition spelled out in Deuteronomy 32.6:
‘Do you thus repay Yahweh,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is not he your father who created you,
who made you and established you?’
One reason why Christian Old Testaments give the last word to Malachi is that he seems, modern interpreters not necessarily agreeing, to point to the worship of God’s moving beyond Israel
What does believing in Jesus’ name actually mean? Muslims believe in a prophet named Jesus, but somehow I suspect you won’t be wanting to include them among those who have the ‘right’ to become children of God.
It’s not about what I do or don’t want. That has no relevance. What is relevant is what Christ said.
We can read what Christ said in the Scriptures. In John He goes on to answer this question. (John 5:23-24, 8:21-24, 14:6 and many more cover aspects of this).
The good news is that we have the Scriptures to look to for ourselves.
These might satisfactorily answer the question some questions, but not the one that I am asking. What does believing on the Name of Jesus mean? Believing that Jesus is a name? Believing that someone had that name?
Isn’t it great that we have lots of Scriptures. Which one should I choose to read and why?
The ‘name’ of someone refers to their power and authority. ‘I warn you in the name of the King’, for example, is a claim to have the monarch’s authority behind you.
The divine name, in the OT, is so awesomely powerful that it cannot be pronounced.
To believe in Jesus’ name, then, is a trusting claim that the power and authority to save do belong to Jesus. Hope this helps.
If there are two routes the CofE can go from here, it’s a bit reminiscent of asking road directions in Ireland. If you want to get to where you’re going, I wouldn’t be starting from here. The choices are between being able to be truthful, or continuing to penalise the truthfulness of people who don’t fit the cis-het straightjacket. The latter being a choice for dishonesty. I don’t see how allowing people to be honest about themselves creates a winner takes all situation where people get hurt. Have you not been listening to gay folk as they testify to the… Read more »
Adrian, I agree that if this issue is treated as a zero sum game then a lot of damage is being done and will continue to be wrought. However, I will quibble with your dichotomised argument: 1) ‘everyone is a child of God’ is a theological route not a sociological one. Progressives rarely if never imply that conservatives are not thinking about faith and God when they propose their arguments; please extend the same courtesy to those you disagree with. 2) I think the Jewish people might argue with ‘only those who believe in Jesus… [are] children of God’, with… Read more »
What precisely do you mean by ‘the Jewish people’? Do you regard this people as a homogenous entity? Or do you just mean people who follow any of the many expressions of the religion of Judaism? In which case, why not just say ‘Jews’?
Hello Adrian, thank you for voicing your thoughts. You wrote: “There is no middle way that unites these 2 groups.” Well I think there is: His name is Jesus Christ, and our spiritual communion is only, ever, in Him. Our call isn’t to cut ourselves off from people with different views, but to give our hearts to Him as He gives Himself to us to the point of no turning back, and to open our hearts to the flow of God’s Love to others. It’s not a competition of holiness and who is morally most ‘right’. It’s about death to… Read more »
Jesus tells us to avoid false teachers and false teaching as do the Apostles several times in the New Testament.
Nobody wants to do that but if people come teaching a different gospel to the one we’ve received from Christ and the Apostles we’ve got to obey Christ.
The tragedy is that people are teaching things that threaten the salvation of those who hear them.
I think of that every time I go to churches that have military flags hanging in them. And national flags. The abomination of desolation standing where it has no right to be. But then, my close friend the former military chaplain stands beside me when we receive communion at diocesan events. Is one of us a false teacher? We can’t both be right. How should we handle that? James and Paul practiced their Christianity differently. Many thousands of Jewish Christians at the end of Acts were following Jesus in the context of observing Torah and Jewish tradition. This was in… Read more »
I have sympathy for your views, even if I don;t agree with them. But I am also wondering.
What other false teachings do you think should be avoided? I’m not looking for one of St Paul’s lists, but a few areas which are particularly relevant for contemporary people, and for the contemporary church.
As far as I see it. It’s relatively straightforward. Does Scripture treat the issue as serious? I.E does it clearly state that this threatens our salvation. The key text that I find hard to explain away here is 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and it discusses quite a few issues that are hugely relevant to “contemporary” people and the “contemporary” church. So ultimately we need to be led by God has spoken in Scripture. Other issues can be disagreed upon at a secondary or a tertiary level, but if Scripture teaches that something threatens our salvation and people are arguing otherwise that… Read more »
What is the practical effect of being a ‘child of God’? Unless that is addressed, any discussion becomes fatuous.
If everybody is a ‘child of God’, that has a practical effect on how we treat strangers.
If only committed faithful Christian are ‘children of God’, then that has a practical effect of the need to convert non-Christians.
Let’s be real.
Fr Dean
20 days ago
I’m amazed at the resilience of people like Charlie Bell and Helen King for these bruising encounters. I pray that they are surrounded by people who love them and ease them back into the real world. I’d need a long soak in a fragrant bath after these soul destroying occasions, preferably with a loved one to scrub my back.
Nigel Goodwin
19 days ago
It is not uncommon for those at the top of secular organisations to have a different view to those with feet on the ground. Maybe the company is about to go bust, so immediate sales are needed. Maybe there is a big new contract which needs a change of direction. Maybe as area director will resign if the board doesn’t do what he suggests, and that area is making by far the most profit. Maybe there is a technology revolution which involves a change of direction to maintain market position. What ‘hidden’ plans do the bishops, or indeed God, know… Read more »
Ha ha. I suspect that at this stage such episcopal pronouncements are received on the level of presidential posts on Truth Social.
Ruairidh
18 days ago
Thanks for the Charlie Bell take on your GS. Powerful and prophetic! Let’s have more priests who are ‘campaigners’. The disappointment is palpable, as it should be. We had a similar situation here a few years ago where by a thin margin bishops voted against clergy and laity. Didn’t go well for the bishops afterwards. I like Bell’s take on so called conversion ‘therapy’. Is there a doctor in the house? It’s pseudo-science paired with biblical clap trap. It is illegal to promote where I come from. “…the ridiculous Synod fringe on what is misleadingly called conversion ‘therapy’ took place… Read more »
I think there are 2 routes the C of E can go from here I) is the, ‘everyone is a child of God’, sociological route including the complete spectrum of individual identities (aka radical inclusion) or 2) only ‘ those who believe in the name of Jesus have the right to be called children of God’, one body under Christ the head, the church, the bride of Christ, as represented by marriage, male and female, 2 becoming 1. There is no middle way that unites these 2 groups, they are distinctly separate ideologies/theologies and need to be structurally differentiated if… Read more »
Everyone is a child of God, only some belong to the Body of Christ
Where does the Bible say that everyone is a child of God? Scripture surely says that we are created by God – not the same thing at all, although it does say that we are created in the image and likeness of God. Yet it also tells us that we are dust, and unto dust shall we return. Jesus alone is Son of God. We become children of God by adoption and grace, born again of water and the Holy Spirit. There are two expressions often used in Christian circles that have no Scriptural foundation that I can find. One… Read more »
Acts 17?
I wasn’t thinking directly of authorities, only stating my personal opinion. But actually I have always thought that the presentation in Acts 17:28 of Paul as quoting Aratus of Soli (Phaenomena 5) ‘we are indeed his children’ gives validation to this sentiment as authentically Christian
Thank you ”openmind” and Martin Hughes. Paul was of course arguing against the worship of graven images, and using a quotation from a pagan poet to make his point. Had someone asked him what exactly he meant by ”we being the people/offspring (genos) of God” (Acts 17. 29a), I suppose he would have referred to our being created in the image and likeness of God, and perhaps he would have continued to say that we see that image and likeness undefiled by sin in Christ. To be conformed to Him is to be restored to that likeness. As for the… Read more »
There is no evidence that the ‘father’ referred to in Lalachi 2.10 is Abraham. Rather, the author appears to be drawing on the tradition spelled out in Deuteronomy 32.6:
‘Do you thus repay Yahweh,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is not he your father who created you,
who made you and established you?’
I don’t think your remarks affect what I said about this phrase’s being validated in the Bible for Christian use. Aratus’ sentiment is endorsed.
i think Malachi’s parallelism does conceive of God as father of all Israelites, since a mere patriarch would not take precedence of God in a formal utterance. He is not embracing humanity in general but if Christians are to receive this text they must believe that it is more widely true than the prophet may have perceived. Mind you he was aware that God’s name is great among the Gentiles
If you follow up Paul’s quotation from Aratus, you will see that it refers to the Greek pagan god Zeus. I am no classicist, but I believe that Zeus was known by the pagans as ”father of gods and men”. Not that they believed that he was literally their ancestor, but because he was a kind of super-patriarchal figure. Paul would have regarded Zeus and his cult with disgust, and patriarchal figures are hardly popular in the Church today. It must also be said that the translation ”offspring” is only one possible translation of the word ”genos”. It can mean… Read more »
This whole debate reminds me of C.S. Lewis’ discussion of the use of the word ‘Christian’ (I think it’s in one of the 3 volumes of his Collected Letters), where he talks to a new convert about her confusion over when she ‘became a Christian’. I’m quoting from memory, but he gave the example of a young man who joins the army. The day he joins, he’s a soldier, but then his trainers come and tell him, ‘We’re going to make a soldier of you.’ Hmm! Thus in one sense I ‘became a Christian’ when I was baptized at two… Read more »
It’s a typical Hellenistic hymn to the supreme God, known as Zeus, yes. They are not generally idolatrous in the sense of attributing divine qualities to ‘an image’. There is no expression of disgust but of approval, the audience being asked to recognise the implications of what one of their own poets has said. If Paul had really rejected the sentiment he would have been deceiving his hearers. I’m as entitled to use the phrase as he is.
The address ‘πατερ ουρανιος ´ or ‘Pater coelestis’ was commonly used in prayers to Zeus or Jupiter and the form was adopted into Christian prayer.
‘Scripture surely says that we are created by God – not the same thing at all…’
Well, this verse sees them as equivalent: ‘Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us?’ (Malachi 2.10)
Written to the covenant people of God. You can see that if you finish the verse.
“Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?”
What covenant is the prophet writing about?
Tom is right as I see it particularly through the lens of John.
People are given the right to become children of God by believing in Jesus’ name (John 1:12-13).
Yes, but the author does not say ‘Have we not all one Father? Has not one God chosen us?’ but ‘has not one God created us?’ See also the tradition spelled out in Deuteronomy 32.6:
‘Do you thus repay Yahweh,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is not he your father who created you,
who made you and established you?’
One reason why Christian Old Testaments give the last word to Malachi is that he seems, modern interpreters not necessarily agreeing, to point to the worship of God’s moving beyond Israel
What does believing in Jesus’ name actually mean? Muslims believe in a prophet named Jesus, but somehow I suspect you won’t be wanting to include them among those who have the ‘right’ to become children of God.
It’s not about what I do or don’t want. That has no relevance. What is relevant is what Christ said.
We can read what Christ said in the Scriptures. In John He goes on to answer this question. (John 5:23-24, 8:21-24, 14:6 and many more cover aspects of this).
The good news is that we have the Scriptures to look to for ourselves.
These might satisfactorily answer the question some questions, but not the one that I am asking. What does believing on the Name of Jesus mean? Believing that Jesus is a name? Believing that someone had that name?
Isn’t it great that we have lots of Scriptures. Which one should I choose to read and why?
The ‘name’ of someone refers to their power and authority. ‘I warn you in the name of the King’, for example, is a claim to have the monarch’s authority behind you.
The divine name, in the OT, is so awesomely powerful that it cannot be pronounced.
To believe in Jesus’ name, then, is a trusting claim that the power and authority to save do belong to Jesus. Hope this helps.
If there are two routes the CofE can go from here, it’s a bit reminiscent of asking road directions in Ireland. If you want to get to where you’re going, I wouldn’t be starting from here. The choices are between being able to be truthful, or continuing to penalise the truthfulness of people who don’t fit the cis-het straightjacket. The latter being a choice for dishonesty. I don’t see how allowing people to be honest about themselves creates a winner takes all situation where people get hurt. Have you not been listening to gay folk as they testify to the… Read more »
Adrian, I agree that if this issue is treated as a zero sum game then a lot of damage is being done and will continue to be wrought. However, I will quibble with your dichotomised argument: 1) ‘everyone is a child of God’ is a theological route not a sociological one. Progressives rarely if never imply that conservatives are not thinking about faith and God when they propose their arguments; please extend the same courtesy to those you disagree with. 2) I think the Jewish people might argue with ‘only those who believe in Jesus… [are] children of God’, with… Read more »
What precisely do you mean by ‘the Jewish people’? Do you regard this people as a homogenous entity? Or do you just mean people who follow any of the many expressions of the religion of Judaism? In which case, why not just say ‘Jews’?
Hello Adrian, thank you for voicing your thoughts. You wrote: “There is no middle way that unites these 2 groups.” Well I think there is: His name is Jesus Christ, and our spiritual communion is only, ever, in Him. Our call isn’t to cut ourselves off from people with different views, but to give our hearts to Him as He gives Himself to us to the point of no turning back, and to open our hearts to the flow of God’s Love to others. It’s not a competition of holiness and who is morally most ‘right’. It’s about death to… Read more »
Jesus tells us to avoid false teachers and false teaching as do the Apostles several times in the New Testament.
Nobody wants to do that but if people come teaching a different gospel to the one we’ve received from Christ and the Apostles we’ve got to obey Christ.
The tragedy is that people are teaching things that threaten the salvation of those who hear them.
I hope and pray that people turn back to Christ.
That is loving.
I think of that every time I go to churches that have military flags hanging in them. And national flags. The abomination of desolation standing where it has no right to be. But then, my close friend the former military chaplain stands beside me when we receive communion at diocesan events. Is one of us a false teacher? We can’t both be right. How should we handle that? James and Paul practiced their Christianity differently. Many thousands of Jewish Christians at the end of Acts were following Jesus in the context of observing Torah and Jewish tradition. This was in… Read more »
I have sympathy for your views, even if I don;t agree with them. But I am also wondering.
What other false teachings do you think should be avoided? I’m not looking for one of St Paul’s lists, but a few areas which are particularly relevant for contemporary people, and for the contemporary church.
As far as I see it. It’s relatively straightforward. Does Scripture treat the issue as serious? I.E does it clearly state that this threatens our salvation. The key text that I find hard to explain away here is 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and it discusses quite a few issues that are hugely relevant to “contemporary” people and the “contemporary” church. So ultimately we need to be led by God has spoken in Scripture. Other issues can be disagreed upon at a secondary or a tertiary level, but if Scripture teaches that something threatens our salvation and people are arguing otherwise that… Read more »
St Augustine had a similar position with regard to science.
Getting on people’s tits is not loving
Thank you, hidden sister, for such a thoughtful and beautiful expression of the gospel, a rare and cheering find on Thinking Anglicans. Thank you.
What is the practical effect of being a ‘child of God’? Unless that is addressed, any discussion becomes fatuous.
If everybody is a ‘child of God’, that has a practical effect on how we treat strangers.
If only committed faithful Christian are ‘children of God’, then that has a practical effect of the need to convert non-Christians.
Let’s be real.
I’m amazed at the resilience of people like Charlie Bell and Helen King for these bruising encounters. I pray that they are surrounded by people who love them and ease them back into the real world. I’d need a long soak in a fragrant bath after these soul destroying occasions, preferably with a loved one to scrub my back.
It is not uncommon for those at the top of secular organisations to have a different view to those with feet on the ground. Maybe the company is about to go bust, so immediate sales are needed. Maybe there is a big new contract which needs a change of direction. Maybe as area director will resign if the board doesn’t do what he suggests, and that area is making by far the most profit. Maybe there is a technology revolution which involves a change of direction to maintain market position. What ‘hidden’ plans do the bishops, or indeed God, know… Read more »
Perhaps the bishops are about to issue yet another hollow apology to the LGBTQ community?
Ha ha. I suspect that at this stage such episcopal pronouncements are received on the level of presidential posts on Truth Social.
Thanks for the Charlie Bell take on your GS. Powerful and prophetic! Let’s have more priests who are ‘campaigners’. The disappointment is palpable, as it should be. We had a similar situation here a few years ago where by a thin margin bishops voted against clergy and laity. Didn’t go well for the bishops afterwards. I like Bell’s take on so called conversion ‘therapy’. Is there a doctor in the house? It’s pseudo-science paired with biblical clap trap. It is illegal to promote where I come from. “…the ridiculous Synod fringe on what is misleadingly called conversion ‘therapy’ took place… Read more »