It is characteristic of postmodern art that the relationship between the artist and the work of art produced is not as straightforward as we are accustomed to expect. Conventionally an art object such as a painting or sculpture is understood to be the work of an individual artist, and its public value depends, to a degree at least, on the identity and status of that artist - a convention that is readily exploited for commercial purposes. Increasingly, however, the relationship between artist and art object is becoming blurred, notably through the emergence of ‘art collectives’.

My book has now been republished by Wipf & Stock.

From the back cover:

Tracing the powerful motif of the ‘coming of the Son of man’ from Daniel through to Revelation, Andrew Perriman provides thought-provoking ideas about eschatological narrative. What was it like to hear the biblical proclamation of this ‘coming’ for the first time in a cultural, political and religious context very different from our own? How did early Christians think about the imminence of the promised ‘day of the Lord’? What difference did this message make to how they thought, lived and spread the gospel message?

This book engages the minds of jaded twenty-first century postmoderns who have ‘heard it all before’. By seeing the fulfilment of much of New Testament apocalyptic in events of the first centuries, Perriman proposes that in some important sense we have moved beyond eschatology - into an age of renewed community and mission that is creational in its scope. The Coming of the Son of Man is important reading for those who want to engage in the debate concerning what church is - and will be.

In response to Peter’s post about the Evangelical Alliance statement of faith, I would suggest that this sort of statement is designed for a particular purpose and does it admirably. An organization like the EA needs to define a doctrinal position that is acceptable across the spectrum of evangelical churches in the UK and cannot really be criticized for not being sufficiently imaginative or radical. Having said that, I can’t help but take issue with most of the statements in one way or another - on the understanding that this is not simply a negative exercise, a mean-spirited swipe at mainstream evangelicalism. It reflects the fact that even these magisterial pronouncements are unavoidably part of a larger conversation. There are, in fact, some indications in it which betray a certain provisionality - I get the impression that there are issues that have not been fully thought through, background debates that have not been fully resolved.