login basecamp neonews page

Monthly Archive for January, 2008

get radical

radical wesley
radical wesley


Does the love of God make any difference in today’s world?

That’s the question Howard Snyder addresses in this radical book about the radical John Wesley, arguably the preeminent revolutionary of authentic Christianity in the West. He was despised and persecuted in his day for bringing the message of God’s love to the teeming masses of England’s poor and disenfranchised. Still today he remains an object of attack from rabid defenders of institutionalism. This recent posting at Christianity Today magazine site is a classic attack on Wesley’s Love Ethics (from Christianity Today’s Web site):

From: Dr. Michael A. Smith Posted: November 21, 2007 8:21 AM As something of a Wesley scholar, I believe that much of what we view as truth about Wesley has come from a revision of history re-written by the Methodist church. I have tried and failed to look at Wesley from the standpoint of his being an Enlightenment thinker. As a contemporary of Newton and others he fought against intellectual freedom and advanced the sola scriptura (the Bible as the only source of truth). While we exhaust the Bible, we must guard ourselves from the tempation of worshipping the Bible as the ultimate truth. In effect, Wesley was an early fundamentalist who denied the doctrines of the Reformation such as election and predestination and purported the heretical teachings of Jacob Arminius. The Council of Dort declared Arminius to be a heretic. His teachings take away the very characteristics that make God to be God. Wesley was a dictatorial leader and very unbending in church discipline. While his life had purpose, he had little or no balance.

Somewhat miffed, I offered Mr. Smith some food for thought:

From: Keith McCallum Posted: November 25, 2007 12:14 AM Despite Dr. Smith’s derogatory words about Wesley, the fact remains that he is one of the most influential voices in biblical Christianity, with spiritual fruit unparalleled by anyone of his era, or since. I find it incredulous anyone could consider themselves a scholar of Wesley and miss the obvious import of his life or disregard the tens of thousands of poor, suffering, orphaned and disenfranchised whose lives were salvaged by Wesley. If Wesley “took away the very characteristics that make God to be God,” then it’s certainly fair to say God would love to see more such men Smith would label as having “little or no balance.” Wesley was one with the “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. James 1:27 (NASB)

Wesley’s enemies have never been able to quell the overwhelming impact of God’s love poured out through this man’s life and Bible teachings. Snyder extrapolates powerful insights into this man’s Love Ethics which are directly applicable to the effort here in northeast Ohio Xenos, and it’s a book well-worth every dollar paid.

From a review from Amazon.com:

Howard Snyder’s third book in his series regardng renewed church life (The Problem of Wineskins and Community of the King) focuses on the contribution of John Wesley to the renewal of existing church patterns. After first giving a brief history of the conversion of Wesley and the growth of the Methodists, Snyder then brings Wesley face to face with today’s church.

The fundamental issues at stake in Snyder’s arguements are:

1) How do you renew the church without destroying it?

2) How do you gain an apreciation for the apostolic faith in a contemporary context?

3) How do you touch people that the current tradition of the church doesn’t touch?

Beautifully, Wesley addresses all of these. It is amazing that Wesley’s voice is as fresh today as it was two centuries ago. In Radical Wesley, Snyder brings this voice out with clairty and alacrity to our current situation. I heartily recommend this to those who are searching to address the gospel in light of post-moderism.

beware of buffy

buffy.jpg
buffy.jpg

I was alarmed by what I heard on Fundy Radio today. One of the more prestigious and highly-education speakers gave this warning:

“Tell your friends and loved ones to stay away from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The occult is nothing to play with, and many are those who’ve learned this lesson the hard way.”

A shiver went down my spine, because I’ve watched Buffy’s vampire-slaying gore before — never more than 10 minutes at a time, of course, it always seemed so silly, but somewhat intriguing — yet I did watch, and I was exposed.

Does this explain why teenagers seem so retarded, I wondered? Those boys did watch Buffy at times…No, no, I know it’s perfectly natural, especially in male teenagers.

Anti-Buffy Christianity is, I think, symptomatic of the impotency of sheltered Christianity.

[Read more →]

Man-to-Man

I was compelled to stay up last night, engrossed with talking to Sean. I’ve always heard of these “man-to-man” talks fathers should have with sons — my dad tried it so many times I can’t even count them — but now at age 52 with three boys, I think maybe I get it. A “man-to-man” with dad always meant a lecture, which isn’t a terribly earth-shaking event since parents can dish out lectures at a-dime-a-dozen. Still, it’s the curse of parents, I suppose, to dish it out, knowing it probably won’t get heard.

But now I understand the “man-to-man” quite differently. I don’t believe it’s a lecture. It can’t possibly be. Men can’t really lecture men, in my experience. The male ego and machismo is the original “Clash of Titans” in which nobody really wins, but perhaps one gets more “beaten-down” in the end.

What proved so illuminating was to understand “Man-to-Man” means something more like, “Well hello there, son! You made it after all!” And there’s something sobering but still wonderful to see when your son is suddenly standing there fully grown and standing eye-to-eye, adult-to-adult, “Man-to-Man.”

It’s a breathtaking experience. It’s not at all like the sad-but-beautiful face we parents try put on the truly-tragic realization that “they’re all grown up now, dear.” That one comes as a rude shock, I think, because it means the kids aren’t so wonderful and sweet any more, and their delightful laughter and high-pitched voices have cracked and croaked and dipped into teenage bass tones. What a heartbreaking transition that is! Yuck!

But the “Man-to-man” is quite different altogether. You only realize it when it’s already in-motion. A real “Man-to-Man” talk can’t be contrived.

[Read more →]