stephenmurray.co.za » Incarnational

The Incarnation

Stephen Murray — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:42:06 +0000

In the build up to Christmas I thought I’d have a go at two sermons on the doctrine of the incarnation. In the first sermon I explored a little bit of just exactly what the incarnation is and why its so important, in the second sermon I looked at how the incarnation completely changes the way we live and turns our world upside down.

Incarnation: Part I

Incarnation: Part II

Incarnation is the Wrong Theological Category…

Stephen Murray — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 06:44:37 +0000

…to describe mission as far as Tim Chester is concerned. Read his fascinating thoughts and healthy critique of trendy missionals. I think I might have been a bit guilty in this area for blurring categories.

Missional = House/Household Church?

Stephen Murray — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:47:14 +0000

In a lot of conversation in the missional/emerging blogsphere I’m beginning to pick up a trend that seems to be propagating the following formula: ‘missional’ = house/household church. I’m not sure if I’m completely comfortable with that. Conversely it seems that big church cannot equal ‘missional’ in the frame work of some thinkers on this subject. Jason raises some talking points on this very issue. The pragmatist in me is a little concerned about this trend. I’m a big fan of house/household church (I know they’re not completely the same thing – forgive me) – but I definitely don’t think its the only way that church must be done to be truly missional and incarnational and I think that any movement that propagates that type of thinking needs to be careful and notice the amount of freedom which scripture gives us to paint on the canvas of ‘church’.

That thing called ‘Church’

Stephen Murray — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:24:03 +0000

During 2007 I had interactions with numerous church pastors and planters, both in the flesh and on the web. Through these I’ve become convinced that I need to get my ecclesiology clear in my head over the course of 2008. So I’m going to concentrate my studies in this area. Here’s a list of some of the questions I want to have a look at (feel free to point me towards literature that deals with any of the questions below):

According to the New Testament what do you have to have, as absolute minimum, for a church to exist?

What is the relationship between the church and the Kingdom of God?

What is the relationship between the church and social concern (as opposed to the relationship between Christians and social concern)?

What is the relationship between the church (local) and culture?

Is the Knox-Robinson view of church too narrow?

What does over-realised eschatology look like in the church?

What does under-realised eschatology look like in the church?

How do the above two questions relate to the plausibility of the homogeneous unit principle?

What do those same two questions have to say about the depth of gospel community a church should be attempting?

Are multi-site churches theologically viable?

I think these questions are crucial to not only ponder but begin to give solid biblical answers to if a new group of young leaders aim to plant and grow fresh expressions of church that reflect the pattern of the New Testament.

Nailing My Colours to the Mast

Stephen Murray — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:23:16 +0000

According to Darrin Patrick’s classifications, along with some commentary by Andrew Jones, I’m probably a combination of the ‘Emerging Attractional’ and ‘Emerging Incarnational’ but of the ‘Neo-Reformed’ variety. Huh?