I've more or less finished my undergraduate dissertation and have settled upon the title The Formation and Identity of the People of God: Messianic Ecclesiology In Galatians 3:10-14. My original draft was 8,000 words over the limit so this final draft has been heavily butchered and there are a few too many missing chunks of argument for my liking.

If anyone is bored and would be kind enough to read some or all of it I'd be really grateful. I've read it through about a zillion times but I'm still finding grammatical errors as well as problems with my arguments. You can read the .pdf file by clicking here.

The thesis runs something like this: Paul's opponents in Galatia are being encouraged to be circumcised and to observe Jewish food laws, and the fellowship is now fragmenting along Jew-Gentile lines.The main problem is not the superiority of "faith" over "works" as a means of salvation, but one of ecumenism and fellowship. The children of Abraham are not those who are circumcised, but those who share in Christ and the Spirit. In Gal 3:10-14 Paul traces the historical development of the people of God as embodied in the corporate Messiah Jesus, right through from the promise, through the curse of the exile and on to the gift of the Spirit. We are saved by his faithfulness to God. Christ's work nullifies any divisions in the people of God brought about by the works of the law. The Spirit, not circumcision, defines who the people of God are, and this is reflected in their behaviour. Ethics function as a boundary marker as much as dogma or Torah rites.

Bedtime.

I'm very, very, tired. I've been up since the crack of dawn travelling to London and when we arrived Richard and I decided to pinch pennies by not spending money on public transport and walking everywhere instead. Only thing is, London is a very big place, and to walk all the way from Victoria Coach Station to King's College and then to walk from King's College to Bermondsey is a log, long way when you're carrying bag.

Anyhow, we got to meet up with Kyle, which was a thoroughly pleasant experience, as was N T Wright's lecture. The lecture was on Apocalyptic and Postmodernity and was both enlightening and challenging. I took a tonne of notes and I'll post some of the highlights from the lecture when I get back to Manchester. Tomorrow's lecture is on the Bible and Christian Imagination, should be interesting. I'll close with a couple of quotes from the day's adventures:

N T Wright: "Postmodernity preaches the doctrine of the fall to modernity. It shows modernity that it has not conquered evil, that all its claims to truth and power are corrupt, and that its righteousness is a filthy rags."

Me: That's quite a biblical beard you've got there Kyle.

Kyle: Yeah, I like to wear my orthodoxy on my chin.

If you heard a loud and repeated banging noise this morning at about 9.30am it was probably the sound of me banging my head against my desk in this morning's Social Action lecture. Admittedly I am often more ungracious and impatient than I should be but I get so fed up when I'm in the final semester of the final year of my degree and people still passionately and vehemently insist on vocally defending points of view such as:

- Jesus' teaching is spiritual, not political. Christians shouldn't get involved in Politics.(Proof text: "Give to God what is God's, Give to Caesar...etc etc.)

- Social Action means the same thing as the Social Gospel

- Jesus' main priority was to make sure people were going to go the heaven, he wasn't really concerned with social justice issues or politics.

- Christians in politics are compromising their faith. We are to have nothing to do with the world whatsoever.

Such arguments belong in the bin, and I get fed up of hearing them every single week. The matter is made a thousand times worse by the fact that they are arguments from sentiment - the very worst kind of arguments in theology - and as such they are not only impossible to support ("but that's not what I've always believed!") but equally impossible to refute, not because they are good arguments, but because they have no substance to them whatsoever.

Seriously folks, if any of you are considering studying theology but are unwilling to change any of your views on anything, then you really ought to reconsider and save on the £12,000 it's going to cost you just to get educated.

I'm grumpy, as you can tell.

N T Wright is lecturing in London this week and Richard, Kyle, and I have decided to pop along and meet up and go to the lectures. You can find out about the lectures here.

If anyone is in London this Weds or Thurs and fancies meeting up for a beer/coffee (deleting according to denominational standpoint on alcohol) and taking in an N T Wright lecture or two then e-mail me and let me know.