Photo: freeimages.co.uk

Dear Christis,

I am writing in response to Tom Hardy's letter regarding an article I wrote which appeared in issue 89 of Christis. He writes that "terms like 'wrong' seem directly to contradict his assertion that "we are in no place to judge as we are all sinners"." Surely he will agree that the term "sinner" is meaningless unless we accept the concept of sin and so some things are "wrong"?

I agree that the parable was limited: it was a fairly simple story meant to provoke thought. By writing further I went well beyond what was contained in the parable although I also clarified some aspects of the parable.

I would reject the idea that "'evangelical' Christianity forces singular interpretations of the contents of the Bible" - look at the difference between Arminianism and Calvinism if you need to be convinced of this. I would however assert that the belief in absolute truth requires an attempt to follow it as best as possible.

I seem to remember writing the article in such as style as to make it clear it was my opinion - not "telling people what to think" as Tom writes. I also never labelled myself as "progressive" - such words have little real meaning. I was considering the possibility that someone might consider themselves progressive to allow Christians to believe what they want. Apologies if that wasn't very clear. Tom seems to have missed what I felt was the main point in the article - inclusion of all without compromising truth. I'm not saying that this is easy, only that we should attempt it.

James Porter