Would love to hear your thoughts, if you have time to watch it
Specifically, do you agree with them? Or do they go too far (in for example saying things like "I don't care" about the "literal" meaning)? And what about the New Testament? What about the danger of trying to find a "deeper meaning" to things like the resurrection, which would then undercut the reality of the resurrection? I do think that what they are saying supports my conviction that the truth is always in the middle, in this case between a literalism that clings to the historical meaning on one hand, and the rejection of the historical on the other - but what do you think?
I mentioned in The Journey that I wrote a song based on Isaiah 2, which is one of my favorite OT passages:
In days to come, the mountain of the Lord’s house
shall be established as the highest mountain, and raised above the hills.
All nations shall stream toward it. Many peoples shall come and say:
“Come, let us go up to the Lord’s mountain, to the house of the God of Jacob, That he may instruct us in his ways, and we may walk in his paths.” For from Zion shall go forth instruction, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He shall judge between the nations, and set terms for many peoples.
They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; One nation shall not raise the sword against another, nor shall they train for war again. House of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord!
I hope you like the song!
This is Michael Knowles' commentary on the murder of Charlie Kirk, and directly on the press conference about the arrest - In the middle is a great speech by the governor of Utah - overall excellent stuff if you have 1.5 hr to spend on it
with some Florida colleagues - all of them Protestant, but with varying traditions on the Eucharist - it was encouraging to hear how there are some Protestant denominations that have a real respect for the Sacrament (and I'm not talking about Anglicans or even Lutherans):