Skip to main content

Godpod and theological resources

I have had a great evening listening to a whole stack of theological podcasts from St Paul's Theological Centre, London, UK. There are over 60 podcasts available from the St Paul's website or on iTunes that cover a whole range of topics in Christian ethics, spirituality, systematic theology, history, Christian biography etc.with experts from across UK.

The format is pretty simple: a three way discussion between Dr Jane Williams, Revd Dr Mike Lloyd, Revd Dr Graham Tomlin and a special guest or two each session (I've listenind to Prof. Nigel Biggar, Prof. NT Wright, Dr David Hilborn, Prof. Andrew Walker, Prof. Alister McGrath, and a hosts of others so far). Each lasts a bit less than an hour, but there's plenty to think about and chew over. If you're looking for some really good input, and some fun theological discussion from leading evangelical thinkers, then head over to St Paul's Centre and their Godpod page.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Hi, I am from Australia.

Please find some references which point out that the never-ending babble/babel of theologians has nothing to do with Truth, and that theologians have never ever been the source of the Process that IS True Religion.

http://www.beezone.com/up/spiritualadeptsrootreligion.html

http://www.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/truth-god.aspx

http://www.dabase.org/dht7.htm

http://www.dabase.org/tfrbkyml.htm

http://www.beezone.com/AdiDa/not_elsewhere.html
17 January 2012 at 06:08
Michael Leyden... said…
Anonymous - thanks for the links. I wonder why youdidnt leave your name: it seems strange addressing someone as "Anonymous"?

Anyway, I guess you know what I'm going to say: we shall agree to disagree, I hope. I have no idea what gives you such confidence that you can know what the True Religion is, that you are so anti men and women who spend their lives thinking about these things. I suppose a flippant retort might be that your statements are themselves a form of theology -- does that make you a theologian, and are you now babbling/babeling on? But I want to steer away from flippancy. On a serious note, true religion as I see it is relationship with the living God who is Father Son and Holy Spirit. I agree with you that no theologian is the source of that: God only is the source of that relationship, and mediates it to us in Jesus Christ. But I suspect that's not really your bag either. I hope and pray that one day it might be.

All friendly wishes from UK to you and yours in Oz,
Michael
17 January 2012 at 20:39
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

David Clough on Barth

For those who are interested, here  is an interview with Professor David Clough from earlier this year on the subject of Barth's theological development. It has recently made its way online...alas, the interviewer (me!) has been edited out. The interview was for a new DVD Interactive Multimedia Timeline created  by R ev. Dr Tim Hull at St John's College Nottingham. Several high quality scholars agreed to be interviewed, including Dr Karen Kilby, Dr Ben Fulford, Professor Antony Thiselton, Professor David Fergusson, and several others forthcoming. David Clough is Professor of Theological Ethics at Chester University, UK, and wrote his doctoral thesis on the interpretation of Barth's ethics. It was published in 2005 as, Ethics in Crisis: Interpreting Barth's Ethics (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005).
1 comment
Continue reading...

Barth on Scripture: George Hunsinger et al.

Finding time for anything other than poor quality posting has been a problem recently: parish ministry rightly has first place, and then there's the small matter of a PhD... BUT, I have had time for some reviewing, and have recently finished a review of George Hunsinger (ed), Thy Word is Truth: Barth on Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eedrmans, 2012). It is a really interesting book, and worthy of reading...in fact read my review in Theology when (if?) it is published later this year. For now, though, here's a lovely quote from hunsinger's introductory chapter as he explains something of the significance of dialectical interpretation for Barth's approach to scripture: The cross and resurrection of Christ, as proclaimed by Paul, were for Barth the paradigmatic case. They were what finally made necessry the procedure of dialectic interpretation. What held Christ's cross and resurrection together, he suggested, was not a concept but a name, not a system but a narrative
Post a Comment
Continue reading...