There is much to like about and much to learn from Jason Staples’ book Paul and the Resurrection of Israel: Jews, Former Gentiles, Israelites, but I have serious doubts about the central thesis, which is that Paul’s overarching goal is the regathering and restoration of all Israel, including the tribes of the northern kingdom lost among the nations:

Immediately after the catastrophe of the war against Rome, Jesus tells his disciples, the Son of Man will be seen coming with the clouds of heaven (Matt. 24:29-30). Certain things will then ensue. The angels will gather those whom he had chosen and sent out to the ends of the earth with the message of the kingdom of God (24:31). The delayed marriage of the bridegroom and the bride will be celebrated (25:1-13).

The debate about Christmas and politics goes on. Reflecting on Tommy Robinson’s campaign to “put Christ back into Christmas,” soon-to-be Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, is quoted in an interview.

In part one, we looked at the argument that the Christmas stories, the career of Jesus more generally, and the mission of his followers support the view that the church and the societies in which it bears witness are obligated to welcome and include the refugee and migrant. Here we will consider the one large biblical concept to which appeal is made in support of the inclusive agenda—the hospitality extended to the “sojourner” in ancient Israel.

There has been a lot of scrambling for the moral high ground in response to the “far right activist” Tommy Robinson’s campaign to put “Christ back into Christmas.”

One UK based network of churches states: “Christ is self-sacrificial love. Christmas is a celebration of the moment that love entered into the world as a vulnerable human child.”

Elliot has raised some pertinent questions about the continuing relevance of some basic Christian beliefs, given a narrative-historical understanding of the New Testament. They deserve a more substantial answer than I can provide right now, but here’s an outline of how I think we may manage the tension between continuity and change. A recent post on “A revised missional theology” covers some of the ground. You could also have a look at this three part series, though it may be a bit dated now: “The narrative-historical reading of the New Testament: what’s in it for me?”

A. J. Derxsen appears to be a rather conservative, Reformed American blogger, so I’m a bit surprised he bothered to read and comment on my post “Who is Daniel’s son of man?” But he did, and I appreciate it, and here’s an attempt to address the counter-assertions made in his brief critique. It’s far from an adequate response given the amount of scholarship on the subject and the range of opinions, but it did lead to me to wonder if there isn’t something else going on with Daniel’s “coming with the clouds of heaven” imagery.