A student says to you: “To be a Christian is to be a forgiven sinner, no more no less” How  does your understanding of adoption affect how you would respond to this question? Being a Christian has not just to do with justification, but also adoption and sanctification.  A forgiven sinner means you’ve been justified - it sounds very distant, legalistic. Though justification is necessary for someone to stand right before God, it isn’t the only privilege of being a Christian. We are called righteous through Jesus’ sacrifice, but we are also adopted and called sons/ heirs of God. Adoption also has legalistic dimension, the part where we were redeemed from a cursed  way of life - to being in line to the inheritance of God’s kingdom and having security that this is going to happen. We understand that we don’t work to be a son/ heir, but believe and enter the family with a sure inheritance. This point about the security we have is the one that stuck out the most to me as...

What naturally comes to mind when you think about who Jesus is? How has your understanding of who He is grown? how does your Union with Christ change the way you approach your everyday discipleship?  Naturally when I think about Jesus, I think of Him in so many ways, depending on what truth I’m needing to hear at the time.  It reminds me of this rap I used to sing when I was younger:  (from Casting Crowns’ song He Didn’t Die in Vain) Messiah, Creator Baby born to be our Saviour Father, Redeemer Hope of glory, friend of sinners All knowing, all powerful Forgiving, oh so faithful Our helper, our maker Living stone, our mediator Sinless high priest Messenger, prince of peace, Bread of life, Holy One Counsellor, Beloved Son king of ages, King of kings Ruler over everything Emmanuel, Cornerstone Morning star, and Lord of Lords Lamb of God, He is Risen Unto us a Son is given Mighty One of Righteousness Beautiful in holiness Chief Shepherd, one true v...

Examine the nuances and caveats displayed in Bignell’s four-part blog post , exploring the possible background concerns driving his argumentation, and discuss to what extent you agree with his conclusions Bignell opens his first post with rhetorical questions of self-doubt and objections of critics to the artist’s profession. These include: is it worth it? Is it worth the pain? The frustration? The tedium of practising scales, the grind of auditions, the constant sense of being unappreciated, the nagging suspicion that you have spent the best years of your life learning to do something no one really wants to pay you to do..? “Why not just give up and get a real job?”... Why are you making art? Bignell then notices how artists seemingly need and look for justification in response to these critics, but his third blog post ends in agreement with Hans Rookmaker’s title ‘Art Needs No Justification’, stating that there is no harm in doing art simply because you love it. At thi...